<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_22_2339204</id>
	<title>Electromagnetic Pulse Gun To Help In Police Chases</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1264162560000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>adeelarshad82 writes <i>"In an attempt to put an end to dangerous, high-speed police chases, scientists at Eureka Aerospace have developed an electromagnetic pulse gun called the <a href="http://eurekaaerospace.com/news/abc-news-microwave-gun-could-end-high-speed-police-chases">High Power Electromagnetic System</a>, or HPEMS. It develops a high-intensity directed pulse of electricity designed to disable a car's microprocessor system, shutting down all of its systems. Right now the <a href="http://www.motorauthority.com/blog/1041891\_electromagnetic-pulse-gun-stops-cars-cold">prototype seen in a video</a> fills an entire lab, but they have plans to shrink its size to hand-held proportions. Some form of this is already <a href="http://www.motorauthority.com/blog/1033764\_onstar-expands-stolen-vehicle-technology-to-include-remote-ignition-block">featured in OnStar-equipped vehicles</a> though the electromagnetic signal used to disable the vehicle is beamed via satellite, and doesn't cripple the in-car computer, but rather puts it into a mode that allows police to easily catch and then stop the fleeing criminal."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>adeelarshad82 writes " In an attempt to put an end to dangerous , high-speed police chases , scientists at Eureka Aerospace have developed an electromagnetic pulse gun called the High Power Electromagnetic System , or HPEMS .
It develops a high-intensity directed pulse of electricity designed to disable a car 's microprocessor system , shutting down all of its systems .
Right now the prototype seen in a video fills an entire lab , but they have plans to shrink its size to hand-held proportions .
Some form of this is already featured in OnStar-equipped vehicles though the electromagnetic signal used to disable the vehicle is beamed via satellite , and does n't cripple the in-car computer , but rather puts it into a mode that allows police to easily catch and then stop the fleeing criminal .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>adeelarshad82 writes "In an attempt to put an end to dangerous, high-speed police chases, scientists at Eureka Aerospace have developed an electromagnetic pulse gun called the High Power Electromagnetic System, or HPEMS.
It develops a high-intensity directed pulse of electricity designed to disable a car's microprocessor system, shutting down all of its systems.
Right now the prototype seen in a video fills an entire lab, but they have plans to shrink its size to hand-held proportions.
Some form of this is already featured in OnStar-equipped vehicles though the electromagnetic signal used to disable the vehicle is beamed via satellite, and doesn't cripple the in-car computer, but rather puts it into a mode that allows police to easily catch and then stop the fleeing criminal.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867426</id>
	<title>Re:Before deployment</title>
	<author>digsbo</author>
	<datestamp>1264187460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And of course it's not as though the user of the weapon can guarantee the firing effect won't harm bystanders, or for that matter, kill the perpetrator (in the unlikely event he has a pacemaker).
</p><p>And with what we've learned from the "non-lethal" taser, police are far more likely to use it liberally, essentially upping the chances of accidental deaths.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And of course it 's not as though the user of the weapon can guarantee the firing effect wo n't harm bystanders , or for that matter , kill the perpetrator ( in the unlikely event he has a pacemaker ) .
And with what we 've learned from the " non-lethal " taser , police are far more likely to use it liberally , essentially upping the chances of accidental deaths .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And of course it's not as though the user of the weapon can guarantee the firing effect won't harm bystanders, or for that matter, kill the perpetrator (in the unlikely event he has a pacemaker).
And with what we've learned from the "non-lethal" taser, police are far more likely to use it liberally, essentially upping the chances of accidental deaths.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866436</id>
	<title>They can't kill momentum.</title>
	<author>NimbleSquirrel</author>
	<datestamp>1264175160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I just wonder what will happen when they use this on a car hurtling down suburban streets at 100+mph. Killing the electronics would presumably knock out handling and stability controls as well (no power steering, no assisted or anti-lock brakes, no traction control, no airbags). Sure they can stop the engine, but they can't stop momentum. They would just turn the car into an virtually uncontrollable hunk of metal hurtling down the road at 100+mph.... until it hits something.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I just wonder what will happen when they use this on a car hurtling down suburban streets at 100 + mph .
Killing the electronics would presumably knock out handling and stability controls as well ( no power steering , no assisted or anti-lock brakes , no traction control , no airbags ) .
Sure they can stop the engine , but they ca n't stop momentum .
They would just turn the car into an virtually uncontrollable hunk of metal hurtling down the road at 100 + mph.... until it hits something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just wonder what will happen when they use this on a car hurtling down suburban streets at 100+mph.
Killing the electronics would presumably knock out handling and stability controls as well (no power steering, no assisted or anti-lock brakes, no traction control, no airbags).
Sure they can stop the engine, but they can't stop momentum.
They would just turn the car into an virtually uncontrollable hunk of metal hurtling down the road at 100+mph.... until it hits something.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866332</id>
	<title>Re:If it's safer than hot pursuit, go for it</title>
	<author>M. Baranczak</author>
	<datestamp>1264173960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It might result in a worse outcome.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It might result in a worse outcome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It might result in a worse outcome.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867054</id>
	<title>we'll never see drive-by-wire</title>
	<author>r00t</author>
	<datestamp>1264182000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This kills an opportunity to improve vehicles.</p><p>We've had fly-by-wire for ages. It's used in all the giant passenger jets, and in all the modern figter planes. It's wonderful.</p><p>Drive-by-wire would let us get rid of the steering column. That improves layout under the hood and is a bit safer even than a collapsable steering column.</p><p>It would have beaten traditional steering for reliability if implemented with redundancy. An EMP kills **all** the redundant devices at once.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This kills an opportunity to improve vehicles.We 've had fly-by-wire for ages .
It 's used in all the giant passenger jets , and in all the modern figter planes .
It 's wonderful.Drive-by-wire would let us get rid of the steering column .
That improves layout under the hood and is a bit safer even than a collapsable steering column.It would have beaten traditional steering for reliability if implemented with redundancy .
An EMP kills * * all * * the redundant devices at once .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This kills an opportunity to improve vehicles.We've had fly-by-wire for ages.
It's used in all the giant passenger jets, and in all the modern figter planes.
It's wonderful.Drive-by-wire would let us get rid of the steering column.
That improves layout under the hood and is a bit safer even than a collapsable steering column.It would have beaten traditional steering for reliability if implemented with redundancy.
An EMP kills **all** the redundant devices at once.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865568</id>
	<title>Reality catching up to past TV shows</title>
	<author>ArcticBirdman</author>
	<datestamp>1264167120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is interesting in that a TV show from 1994 used a Dodge Viper equipped with such a device to stop vehicles the 'Good' guy was chasing. They were also able to morph the car. I can see that coming soon as well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is interesting in that a TV show from 1994 used a Dodge Viper equipped with such a device to stop vehicles the 'Good ' guy was chasing .
They were also able to morph the car .
I can see that coming soon as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is interesting in that a TV show from 1994 used a Dodge Viper equipped with such a device to stop vehicles the 'Good' guy was chasing.
They were also able to morph the car.
I can see that coming soon as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866342</id>
	<title>What?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264174020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some form of this?  I'm sorry, a computer telling another computer to stop functioning and an electro magnetic pulse weapon are not some form of each other in any universe!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some form of this ?
I 'm sorry , a computer telling another computer to stop functioning and an electro magnetic pulse weapon are not some form of each other in any universe !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some form of this?
I'm sorry, a computer telling another computer to stop functioning and an electro magnetic pulse weapon are not some form of each other in any universe!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865886</id>
	<title>Answers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264169400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What happens when a person going 70mph suddenly loses control of their vehicle?</p></div><p>They won't "lose control", exactly. It'll just get a lot harder to steer, and the car will slow down rapidly</p><p><div class="quote"><p>How accurate can that sort of gun be? Over what sort of angle and distance is it will effective?</p></div><p>Not terribly accurate. The spread of the beam is determined by the antenna geometry and the frequency of the radiation. The range, of course, is subject to the power level. With a big antenna, and enough power, you could disable a car from miles away. Practically speaking, it'll probably need to be effective from 100 yards or so in order to be useful. I expect that the effective width of the "beam" would be several lanes wide at that range.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Is there a way to shield the car with a faraday cage to prevent this sort of thing from happening?</p></div><p>Not really. I mean, you *could do so*, but it'd be hard to make the car 100\% shielded. It's probably 90\% covered already, actually.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>And if not, wouldn't this just mess up the police cars?</p></div><p>Well, the bulk of the radiation pattern will go forward, obviously. The backward-facing component can be made arbitrarily small.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>What's going to stop the police (or **AA) from "accidentally" frying your computer with one of these?</p></div><p>Probable cause? The police can't just destroy property because they feel like it. Unless you're currently engaged in a crime, they wouldn't have a reason to try to kill your computer.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What happens when a person going 70mph suddenly loses control of their vehicle ? They wo n't " lose control " , exactly .
It 'll just get a lot harder to steer , and the car will slow down rapidlyHow accurate can that sort of gun be ?
Over what sort of angle and distance is it will effective ? Not terribly accurate .
The spread of the beam is determined by the antenna geometry and the frequency of the radiation .
The range , of course , is subject to the power level .
With a big antenna , and enough power , you could disable a car from miles away .
Practically speaking , it 'll probably need to be effective from 100 yards or so in order to be useful .
I expect that the effective width of the " beam " would be several lanes wide at that range.Is there a way to shield the car with a faraday cage to prevent this sort of thing from happening ? Not really .
I mean , you * could do so * , but it 'd be hard to make the car 100 \ % shielded .
It 's probably 90 \ % covered already , actually.And if not , would n't this just mess up the police cars ? Well , the bulk of the radiation pattern will go forward , obviously .
The backward-facing component can be made arbitrarily small.What 's going to stop the police ( or * * AA ) from " accidentally " frying your computer with one of these ? Probable cause ?
The police ca n't just destroy property because they feel like it .
Unless you 're currently engaged in a crime , they would n't have a reason to try to kill your computer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What happens when a person going 70mph suddenly loses control of their vehicle?They won't "lose control", exactly.
It'll just get a lot harder to steer, and the car will slow down rapidlyHow accurate can that sort of gun be?
Over what sort of angle and distance is it will effective?Not terribly accurate.
The spread of the beam is determined by the antenna geometry and the frequency of the radiation.
The range, of course, is subject to the power level.
With a big antenna, and enough power, you could disable a car from miles away.
Practically speaking, it'll probably need to be effective from 100 yards or so in order to be useful.
I expect that the effective width of the "beam" would be several lanes wide at that range.Is there a way to shield the car with a faraday cage to prevent this sort of thing from happening?Not really.
I mean, you *could do so*, but it'd be hard to make the car 100\% shielded.
It's probably 90\% covered already, actually.And if not, wouldn't this just mess up the police cars?Well, the bulk of the radiation pattern will go forward, obviously.
The backward-facing component can be made arbitrarily small.What's going to stop the police (or **AA) from "accidentally" frying your computer with one of these?Probable cause?
The police can't just destroy property because they feel like it.
Unless you're currently engaged in a crime, they wouldn't have a reason to try to kill your computer.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865506</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866126</id>
	<title>Re:Uh-oh...</title>
	<author>aaandre</author>
	<datestamp>1264171560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The lesson of the taser is that it's fun, fun, fun!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The lesson of the taser is that it 's fun , fun , fun !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The lesson of the taser is that it's fun, fun, fun!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30869820</id>
	<title>Stop them with legislation</title>
	<author>Marrow</author>
	<datestamp>1264264020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Make a date when by all cars and trucks are requires to have a "slow down"<br>chip in their computer.   Not to stop the car, but more of a governor to make<br>30mph the top speed for a car in that area.  A audible warning lets the driver<br>know the governor is about to go into effect.</p><p>Authorized vehicles would have the governor disabled.</p><p>They could even implement the system in school zones.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Make a date when by all cars and trucks are requires to have a " slow down " chip in their computer .
Not to stop the car , but more of a governor to make30mph the top speed for a car in that area .
A audible warning lets the driverknow the governor is about to go into effect.Authorized vehicles would have the governor disabled.They could even implement the system in school zones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Make a date when by all cars and trucks are requires to have a "slow down"chip in their computer.
Not to stop the car, but more of a governor to make30mph the top speed for a car in that area.
A audible warning lets the driverknow the governor is about to go into effect.Authorized vehicles would have the governor disabled.They could even implement the system in school zones.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867078</id>
	<title>Re:I can't wait...</title>
	<author>joocemann</author>
	<datestamp>1264182300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Criminals have no qualms about using force, why would they resort to a weapon like this? There's already effective car stoppers out there like<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.50 caliber rifles and medium machineguns, both of which would be easier to acquire than a weapon like this.</p><p>Or they could just do a PIT manoeuvre or block them off to stop the target car.</p></div><p>So true.  Lmfao.   A friend and I (we live in Cali) were just going over the various california gun laws and how ridiculous they are.</p><p>All of the laws are tied to fines and punishments that are so minimal they are completely IRRELEVANT to any criminal who would choose to commit a crime with a gun.   And in that, the laws do *nothing* deter true criminals from using whatever weapons they want.</p><p>Let's get an anecdote:  If i'm planning a serious bank robbery where I hold people up with a gun, potentially shoot a guard or two, and escape.... I think the least of my worries is the fine I will get for having a magazine larger than 10 rounds!     If I'm going on a shooting rampage, I don't think it matters to me that I'll get in a little trouble for having an Automatic rifle.</p><p>-------<br>All this, nevermind the fact that Cali bans guns by name (fear of the names) than by its actual mechanisms and specs.  Thus, an AK-47 is basically outright banned, but an HK-91 (same bullet, better accuracy though) is legal.<br>-------</p><p>Get an effin' clue people!  Criminals don't give a crap about laws.  That's the whole reason they're criminals in the first place!  ----  I wonder what an intellgent approach to crime might look like... such as identifying the needs of neglected children and making greater efforts to better their lives and guide them....  Oh wait... that's welfare!  (sarcasm) Lets spend millions of tax dollars on EMP guns instead of on helping kids learn to be responsible adults!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Criminals have no qualms about using force , why would they resort to a weapon like this ?
There 's already effective car stoppers out there like .50 caliber rifles and medium machineguns , both of which would be easier to acquire than a weapon like this.Or they could just do a PIT manoeuvre or block them off to stop the target car.So true .
Lmfao. A friend and I ( we live in Cali ) were just going over the various california gun laws and how ridiculous they are.All of the laws are tied to fines and punishments that are so minimal they are completely IRRELEVANT to any criminal who would choose to commit a crime with a gun .
And in that , the laws do * nothing * deter true criminals from using whatever weapons they want.Let 's get an anecdote : If i 'm planning a serious bank robbery where I hold people up with a gun , potentially shoot a guard or two , and escape.... I think the least of my worries is the fine I will get for having a magazine larger than 10 rounds !
If I 'm going on a shooting rampage , I do n't think it matters to me that I 'll get in a little trouble for having an Automatic rifle.-------All this , nevermind the fact that Cali bans guns by name ( fear of the names ) than by its actual mechanisms and specs .
Thus , an AK-47 is basically outright banned , but an HK-91 ( same bullet , better accuracy though ) is legal.-------Get an effin ' clue people !
Criminals do n't give a crap about laws .
That 's the whole reason they 're criminals in the first place !
---- I wonder what an intellgent approach to crime might look like... such as identifying the needs of neglected children and making greater efforts to better their lives and guide them.... Oh wait... that 's welfare !
( sarcasm ) Lets spend millions of tax dollars on EMP guns instead of on helping kids learn to be responsible adults !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Criminals have no qualms about using force, why would they resort to a weapon like this?
There's already effective car stoppers out there like .50 caliber rifles and medium machineguns, both of which would be easier to acquire than a weapon like this.Or they could just do a PIT manoeuvre or block them off to stop the target car.So true.
Lmfao.   A friend and I (we live in Cali) were just going over the various california gun laws and how ridiculous they are.All of the laws are tied to fines and punishments that are so minimal they are completely IRRELEVANT to any criminal who would choose to commit a crime with a gun.
And in that, the laws do *nothing* deter true criminals from using whatever weapons they want.Let's get an anecdote:  If i'm planning a serious bank robbery where I hold people up with a gun, potentially shoot a guard or two, and escape.... I think the least of my worries is the fine I will get for having a magazine larger than 10 rounds!
If I'm going on a shooting rampage, I don't think it matters to me that I'll get in a little trouble for having an Automatic rifle.-------All this, nevermind the fact that Cali bans guns by name (fear of the names) than by its actual mechanisms and specs.
Thus, an AK-47 is basically outright banned, but an HK-91 (same bullet, better accuracy though) is legal.-------Get an effin' clue people!
Criminals don't give a crap about laws.
That's the whole reason they're criminals in the first place!
----  I wonder what an intellgent approach to crime might look like... such as identifying the needs of neglected children and making greater efforts to better their lives and guide them....  Oh wait... that's welfare!
(sarcasm) Lets spend millions of tax dollars on EMP guns instead of on helping kids learn to be responsible adults!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866158</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865578</id>
	<title>Viper?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264167180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No one mentioning Viper, where this was used? Come on, Slashdot!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No one mentioning Viper , where this was used ?
Come on , Slashdot !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No one mentioning Viper, where this was used?
Come on, Slashdot!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30869262</id>
	<title>Re:Microprocessor?</title>
	<author>MoFoQ</author>
	<datestamp>1264258380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or you make and add a surge protector circuit to your car?</p><p>Or even better....fashion a EMP reflector so it knocks out the car chasing you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or you make and add a surge protector circuit to your car ? Or even better....fashion a EMP reflector so it knocks out the car chasing you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or you make and add a surge protector circuit to your car?Or even better....fashion a EMP reflector so it knocks out the car chasing you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865780</id>
	<title>extortion</title>
	<author>bugi</author>
	<datestamp>1264168680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let me inspect your computer without a warrant or this EMP gun might just accidentally discharge in an inconvenient direction.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let me inspect your computer without a warrant or this EMP gun might just accidentally discharge in an inconvenient direction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let me inspect your computer without a warrant or this EMP gun might just accidentally discharge in an inconvenient direction.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865650</id>
	<title>Re:OnStar not EMP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264167720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does that mean with an FM-broadcaster and a Captain crunch whistle, I can drive around town shutting down down peoples cars?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does that mean with an FM-broadcaster and a Captain crunch whistle , I can drive around town shutting down down peoples cars ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does that mean with an FM-broadcaster and a Captain crunch whistle, I can drive around town shutting down down peoples cars?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865492</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866158</id>
	<title>Re:I can't wait...</title>
	<author>indiechild</author>
	<datestamp>1264171860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Criminals have no qualms about using force, why would they resort to a weapon like this? There's already effective car stoppers out there like<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.50 caliber rifles and medium machineguns, both of which would be easier to acquire than a weapon like this.</p><p>Or they could just do a PIT manoeuvre or block them off to stop the target car.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Criminals have no qualms about using force , why would they resort to a weapon like this ?
There 's already effective car stoppers out there like .50 caliber rifles and medium machineguns , both of which would be easier to acquire than a weapon like this.Or they could just do a PIT manoeuvre or block them off to stop the target car .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Criminals have no qualms about using force, why would they resort to a weapon like this?
There's already effective car stoppers out there like .50 caliber rifles and medium machineguns, both of which would be easier to acquire than a weapon like this.Or they could just do a PIT manoeuvre or block them off to stop the target car.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865460</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866154</id>
	<title>Re:OnStar not EMP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264171800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Can't give up your guns, but giving up mobility is fine?</i></p><p>That suggests the obvious compromise solution.... install OnStar (tm) on all guns.  That way anyone can have a gun, but the government can shut down any guns that are being misused.  Plus your gun can ask you if you are okay.</p><p>There, I solved that problem, on to the next one<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:^)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ca n't give up your guns , but giving up mobility is fine ? That suggests the obvious compromise solution.... install OnStar ( tm ) on all guns .
That way anyone can have a gun , but the government can shut down any guns that are being misused .
Plus your gun can ask you if you are okay.There , I solved that problem , on to the next one : ^ )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can't give up your guns, but giving up mobility is fine?That suggests the obvious compromise solution.... install OnStar (tm) on all guns.
That way anyone can have a gun, but the government can shut down any guns that are being misused.
Plus your gun can ask you if you are okay.There, I solved that problem, on to the next one :^)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865750</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30876382</id>
	<title>http://www.paramounthotel.vn</title>
	<author>tanict106</author>
	<datestamp>1264276320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.paramounthotel.vn/" title="paramounthotel.vn" rel="nofollow">http://www.paramounthotel.vn/</a> [paramounthotel.vn]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.paramounthotel.vn/ [ paramounthotel.vn ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.paramounthotel.vn/ [paramounthotel.vn]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866164</id>
	<title>points</title>
	<author>codepunk</author>
	<datestamp>1264171920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Time to bust out that old points distributor.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Time to bust out that old points distributor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Time to bust out that old points distributor.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865582</id>
	<title>try it on my '81 diesel VW</title>
	<author>Gothmolly</author>
	<datestamp>1264167180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since I have a car w/o any electronics, I'm fine.  Not that a diesel Rabbit is really going to outrun a cop car anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since I have a car w/o any electronics , I 'm fine .
Not that a diesel Rabbit is really going to outrun a cop car anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since I have a car w/o any electronics, I'm fine.
Not that a diesel Rabbit is really going to outrun a cop car anyway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866652</id>
	<title>Similar?</title>
	<author>gillbates</author>
	<datestamp>1264177920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Both systems disable the vehicle against the driver's consent.
</p><p>
Imagine, for a moment, what would happen if a thief could - using OnStar - remotely disable your daughter's vehicle on a lonesome stretch of highway.  He doesn't need an EMP gun with a giant capacitor bank when a tethered laptop will do.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Both systems disable the vehicle against the driver 's consent .
Imagine , for a moment , what would happen if a thief could - using OnStar - remotely disable your daughter 's vehicle on a lonesome stretch of highway .
He does n't need an EMP gun with a giant capacitor bank when a tethered laptop will do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Both systems disable the vehicle against the driver's consent.
Imagine, for a moment, what would happen if a thief could - using OnStar - remotely disable your daughter's vehicle on a lonesome stretch of highway.
He doesn't need an EMP gun with a giant capacitor bank when a tethered laptop will do.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865920</id>
	<title>Real life is not like the movies</title>
	<author>mbessey</author>
	<datestamp>1264169640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your average high-speed chase participant is not a criminal mastermind. They're somebody who got caught doing something stupid, and panicked.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your average high-speed chase participant is not a criminal mastermind .
They 're somebody who got caught doing something stupid , and panicked .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your average high-speed chase participant is not a criminal mastermind.
They're somebody who got caught doing something stupid, and panicked.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865538</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865592</id>
	<title>Pacemakers?</title>
	<author>northernboy</author>
	<datestamp>1264167300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did anybody stop to consider the possibility of collateral damage?  Aside from beloved portable electronics, what about a hostage with a pacemaker?  We don't want to disable that device do we?  And to penetrate the body of the car (which side of the engine block are these microprocessors located on, anyway?) they're probably generating a pretty significant pulse.</p><p>What about residences or businesses down range??</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did anybody stop to consider the possibility of collateral damage ?
Aside from beloved portable electronics , what about a hostage with a pacemaker ?
We do n't want to disable that device do we ?
And to penetrate the body of the car ( which side of the engine block are these microprocessors located on , anyway ?
) they 're probably generating a pretty significant pulse.What about residences or businesses down range ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did anybody stop to consider the possibility of collateral damage?
Aside from beloved portable electronics, what about a hostage with a pacemaker?
We don't want to disable that device do we?
And to penetrate the body of the car (which side of the engine block are these microprocessors located on, anyway?
) they're probably generating a pretty significant pulse.What about residences or businesses down range?
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866868</id>
	<title>Re:Uh-oh...</title>
	<author>Angst Badger</author>
	<datestamp>1264180200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This may sound like a good idea, but I suspect the cops will be using this a lot more liberally than intended.</p></div><p>Not only that, given that they are <i>already</i> legally protected from liability in high speed chases -- including cases when bystanders are killed -- I don't expect anyone will have any luck getting their car repairs (or injuries) paid for when the cops overuse it or, just as likely, <i>miss</i> and hit the wrong car. The OnStar kill signal is noxious and prone to abuse, too, but this is just reckless endangerment.</p><p>Good luck talking them out of it, though. Cops being cops, resistance will only encourage them.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This may sound like a good idea , but I suspect the cops will be using this a lot more liberally than intended.Not only that , given that they are already legally protected from liability in high speed chases -- including cases when bystanders are killed -- I do n't expect anyone will have any luck getting their car repairs ( or injuries ) paid for when the cops overuse it or , just as likely , miss and hit the wrong car .
The OnStar kill signal is noxious and prone to abuse , too , but this is just reckless endangerment.Good luck talking them out of it , though .
Cops being cops , resistance will only encourage them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This may sound like a good idea, but I suspect the cops will be using this a lot more liberally than intended.Not only that, given that they are already legally protected from liability in high speed chases -- including cases when bystanders are killed -- I don't expect anyone will have any luck getting their car repairs (or injuries) paid for when the cops overuse it or, just as likely, miss and hit the wrong car.
The OnStar kill signal is noxious and prone to abuse, too, but this is just reckless endangerment.Good luck talking them out of it, though.
Cops being cops, resistance will only encourage them.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30868862</id>
	<title>If you get tired of the anti-cop sentiment</title>
	<author>SmallFurryCreature</author>
	<datestamp>1264253760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you get tired of the anti-cop sentiment then you have to block all the teen boys who want to watch the world burn.
</p><p>This system is only of use to cops to stop people trying to evade arrest. They are NOT going to use it to pull you over for a drink driving test, JUST as they do NOT puncture your tires with a nail-mat at this point in time.
</p><p>But if it stops some idiot from speeding through a residential area not caring who he/she kills in their maddness, then I don't care if they MIGHT be killed when the police tries to stop them. In fact, I don't understand why they don't just shoot the drivers. The bleeding hearts have gone out of control.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you get tired of the anti-cop sentiment then you have to block all the teen boys who want to watch the world burn .
This system is only of use to cops to stop people trying to evade arrest .
They are NOT going to use it to pull you over for a drink driving test , JUST as they do NOT puncture your tires with a nail-mat at this point in time .
But if it stops some idiot from speeding through a residential area not caring who he/she kills in their maddness , then I do n't care if they MIGHT be killed when the police tries to stop them .
In fact , I do n't understand why they do n't just shoot the drivers .
The bleeding hearts have gone out of control .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you get tired of the anti-cop sentiment then you have to block all the teen boys who want to watch the world burn.
This system is only of use to cops to stop people trying to evade arrest.
They are NOT going to use it to pull you over for a drink driving test, JUST as they do NOT puncture your tires with a nail-mat at this point in time.
But if it stops some idiot from speeding through a residential area not caring who he/she kills in their maddness, then I don't care if they MIGHT be killed when the police tries to stop them.
In fact, I don't understand why they don't just shoot the drivers.
The bleeding hearts have gone out of control.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865910</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865944</id>
	<title>Re:Before deployment</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264169880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I wonder if they'll test it on Pacemakers.</i> </p><p>The high speed chase has the potential to get a lot of people killed.</p><p>Nothing can protect you from being in the wrong place at the wrong time - and being caught in the path of a high speed chase is about as wrong a place to be as it can get.</p><p><i>Dozier was accused of fleeing Newark police after officers attempted to pull him over. He led them on a pursuit to Elizabeth, where he ran a red light and smashed his Jeep into the unmarked squad car of Officer Christopher Coon. <br>Coon was violently thrown from the vehicle. Police on the scene initially believed he was dead.<br>He spent six weeks in a coma. It took a surgeon five hours to reconstruct his face with 500 stitches. The crash left Coon with brain trauma that impairs his speech, short-term memory and ability to control his right arm and leg.</i> <a href="http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/01/man\_who\_crashed\_into\_union\_cou.html" title="nj.com">Man who seriously injured Union officer in car chase crash gets 9 years in prison</a> [nj.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder if they 'll test it on Pacemakers .
The high speed chase has the potential to get a lot of people killed.Nothing can protect you from being in the wrong place at the wrong time - and being caught in the path of a high speed chase is about as wrong a place to be as it can get.Dozier was accused of fleeing Newark police after officers attempted to pull him over .
He led them on a pursuit to Elizabeth , where he ran a red light and smashed his Jeep into the unmarked squad car of Officer Christopher Coon .
Coon was violently thrown from the vehicle .
Police on the scene initially believed he was dead.He spent six weeks in a coma .
It took a surgeon five hours to reconstruct his face with 500 stitches .
The crash left Coon with brain trauma that impairs his speech , short-term memory and ability to control his right arm and leg .
Man who seriously injured Union officer in car chase crash gets 9 years in prison [ nj.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder if they'll test it on Pacemakers.
The high speed chase has the potential to get a lot of people killed.Nothing can protect you from being in the wrong place at the wrong time - and being caught in the path of a high speed chase is about as wrong a place to be as it can get.Dozier was accused of fleeing Newark police after officers attempted to pull him over.
He led them on a pursuit to Elizabeth, where he ran a red light and smashed his Jeep into the unmarked squad car of Officer Christopher Coon.
Coon was violently thrown from the vehicle.
Police on the scene initially believed he was dead.He spent six weeks in a coma.
It took a surgeon five hours to reconstruct his face with 500 stitches.
The crash left Coon with brain trauma that impairs his speech, short-term memory and ability to control his right arm and leg.
Man who seriously injured Union officer in car chase crash gets 9 years in prison [nj.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30868514</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting choice of wording</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264248360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes. This technology sucks and is dangerous, with dire financial consequences for those suffering collateral damage. They should abandon this technology and just go back to the good old method of chasing down a car at high speed until it stops safely inside someone's house; or try P.I.T. manouvers and spike strips so the car spins out of control, poughing through pedestrians until it gently stops on top of a crossing student.<br>Boo for technology!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes .
This technology sucks and is dangerous , with dire financial consequences for those suffering collateral damage .
They should abandon this technology and just go back to the good old method of chasing down a car at high speed until it stops safely inside someone 's house ; or try P.I.T .
manouvers and spike strips so the car spins out of control , poughing through pedestrians until it gently stops on top of a crossing student.Boo for technology !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes.
This technology sucks and is dangerous, with dire financial consequences for those suffering collateral damage.
They should abandon this technology and just go back to the good old method of chasing down a car at high speed until it stops safely inside someone's house; or try P.I.T.
manouvers and spike strips so the car spins out of control, poughing through pedestrians until it gently stops on top of a crossing student.Boo for technology!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865498</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866704</id>
	<title>Re:What a great tool for robbery!</title>
	<author>pnewhook</author>
	<datestamp>1264178520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sure, if an EMP gun were real, BUT IT'S NOT REAL!  It doesn't exist.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure , if an EMP gun were real , BUT IT 'S NOT REAL !
It does n't exist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure, if an EMP gun were real, BUT IT'S NOT REAL!
It doesn't exist.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865586</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867122</id>
	<title>Re:Uh-oh...</title>
	<author>misexistentialist</author>
	<datestamp>1264182720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is a lie that Tasers were implemented as an alternative to firearm use. Anything you would have been shot for 30 years ago you will still be shot for. It is now standard practice for police to use tasers and pepper spray to torture suspects into compliance rather than to use physical manipulation. Granted the latter was often painful, but there is a difference between twisting someone's arm behind his back in order to cuff him, and subjecting him to enough torture that he wants to put his arm behind his back to top the pain. It may be easier or even safer, but it is a "cruel and unusual" violation of human rights and indeed only strengthens "anti-cop sentiment." (That and that police are non-productive members of society mostly doing the counter-productive work of "drug enforcement.")</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is a lie that Tasers were implemented as an alternative to firearm use .
Anything you would have been shot for 30 years ago you will still be shot for .
It is now standard practice for police to use tasers and pepper spray to torture suspects into compliance rather than to use physical manipulation .
Granted the latter was often painful , but there is a difference between twisting someone 's arm behind his back in order to cuff him , and subjecting him to enough torture that he wants to put his arm behind his back to top the pain .
It may be easier or even safer , but it is a " cruel and unusual " violation of human rights and indeed only strengthens " anti-cop sentiment .
" ( That and that police are non-productive members of society mostly doing the counter-productive work of " drug enforcement .
" )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is a lie that Tasers were implemented as an alternative to firearm use.
Anything you would have been shot for 30 years ago you will still be shot for.
It is now standard practice for police to use tasers and pepper spray to torture suspects into compliance rather than to use physical manipulation.
Granted the latter was often painful, but there is a difference between twisting someone's arm behind his back in order to cuff him, and subjecting him to enough torture that he wants to put his arm behind his back to top the pain.
It may be easier or even safer, but it is a "cruel and unusual" violation of human rights and indeed only strengthens "anti-cop sentiment.
" (That and that police are non-productive members of society mostly doing the counter-productive work of "drug enforcement.
")</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865910</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865862</id>
	<title>Own your car, yeah baby</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264169220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Who writes this mess?</p></div><p>Only one of the world's largest industrial corporations - DUH!!!  Ermm, well they *were* one of the largest.  Then their sales dropped off.  Wonder why.  Hurray, I can buy a car that the government can control!!!  Morons.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who writes this mess ? Only one of the world 's largest industrial corporations - DUH ! ! !
Ermm , well they * were * one of the largest .
Then their sales dropped off .
Wonder why .
Hurray , I can buy a car that the government can control ! ! !
Morons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who writes this mess?Only one of the world's largest industrial corporations - DUH!!!
Ermm, well they *were* one of the largest.
Then their sales dropped off.
Wonder why.
Hurray, I can buy a car that the government can control!!!
Morons.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865492</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866596</id>
	<title>Re:Onstar?</title>
	<author>pnewhook</author>
	<datestamp>1264177140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>agreed - this system is completely unlike Onstar, except fopr the fact that both stop the car.  You might as well say that this is just like turning off the car ignition.
</p><p>however this is NOT directed EMP.  This is a microwave transmitter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>agreed - this system is completely unlike Onstar , except fopr the fact that both stop the car .
You might as well say that this is just like turning off the car ignition .
however this is NOT directed EMP .
This is a microwave transmitter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>agreed - this system is completely unlike Onstar, except fopr the fact that both stop the car.
You might as well say that this is just like turning off the car ignition.
however this is NOT directed EMP.
This is a microwave transmitter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866592</id>
	<title>Re:If it's safer than hot pursuit, go for it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264177080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>asking the masses to give up control of their property to cover relative corner cases like you show above is WRONG..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>asking the masses to give up control of their property to cover relative corner cases like you show above is WRONG. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>asking the masses to give up control of their property to cover relative corner cases like you show above is WRONG..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865804</id>
	<title>Nothing like a portable holocost.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264168860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Are these guys nuts or con men?

They want to design a portable device to generate a directional EMP to help police stop fleeing cars. Point and click, off goes the suspect's car computer and the thing rolls to a stop. Whee!  Sounds great, doesn't it? But physics and legal liabilities will stop them from getting this out of the lab.

First, EMPs are not directional. So the first time a cop uses it, off goes his car and every car around him along with every bit of electronics in the cars. And every bit of electronics in the homes nearby and the stores and the hospitals, etc. Permanently. Thousands, maybe millions of dollars of damage and potentially many deaths. Let's not forget the folks with pacemakers, hearing aids or insulin pumps, either. The power required to make an EMP strong enough to disable a car isn't trivial either. It takes some huge high voltage capacitors or nasty explosives to manage the job. Los Alamos Labs can do this, but it's very expensive for each EMP produced.

The car computers are pretty well shielded and located in protected areas in the car. So the EMP will have to be much stronger than what's needed to damage the computer. Almost all of the EMP will be reflected. Reflected only God knows where.

Jerks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are these guys nuts or con men ?
They want to design a portable device to generate a directional EMP to help police stop fleeing cars .
Point and click , off goes the suspect 's car computer and the thing rolls to a stop .
Whee ! Sounds great , does n't it ?
But physics and legal liabilities will stop them from getting this out of the lab .
First , EMPs are not directional .
So the first time a cop uses it , off goes his car and every car around him along with every bit of electronics in the cars .
And every bit of electronics in the homes nearby and the stores and the hospitals , etc .
Permanently. Thousands , maybe millions of dollars of damage and potentially many deaths .
Let 's not forget the folks with pacemakers , hearing aids or insulin pumps , either .
The power required to make an EMP strong enough to disable a car is n't trivial either .
It takes some huge high voltage capacitors or nasty explosives to manage the job .
Los Alamos Labs can do this , but it 's very expensive for each EMP produced .
The car computers are pretty well shielded and located in protected areas in the car .
So the EMP will have to be much stronger than what 's needed to damage the computer .
Almost all of the EMP will be reflected .
Reflected only God knows where .
Jerks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are these guys nuts or con men?
They want to design a portable device to generate a directional EMP to help police stop fleeing cars.
Point and click, off goes the suspect's car computer and the thing rolls to a stop.
Whee!  Sounds great, doesn't it?
But physics and legal liabilities will stop them from getting this out of the lab.
First, EMPs are not directional.
So the first time a cop uses it, off goes his car and every car around him along with every bit of electronics in the cars.
And every bit of electronics in the homes nearby and the stores and the hospitals, etc.
Permanently. Thousands, maybe millions of dollars of damage and potentially many deaths.
Let's not forget the folks with pacemakers, hearing aids or insulin pumps, either.
The power required to make an EMP strong enough to disable a car isn't trivial either.
It takes some huge high voltage capacitors or nasty explosives to manage the job.
Los Alamos Labs can do this, but it's very expensive for each EMP produced.
The car computers are pretty well shielded and located in protected areas in the car.
So the EMP will have to be much stronger than what's needed to damage the computer.
Almost all of the EMP will be reflected.
Reflected only God knows where.
Jerks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867502</id>
	<title>Re:This isn't new a new idea at all.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264188840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Their aim better be good, they could disable other cars. Who would be liable for damage if that happened?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Their aim better be good , they could disable other cars .
Who would be liable for damage if that happened ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Their aim better be good, they could disable other cars.
Who would be liable for damage if that happened?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30890764</id>
	<title>Now we understand the second condition.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264437720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"This device complies with part 15 of the FCC Rules. Operation is subject to the following two conditions: (1) This device may not cause harmful interference, and (2) this device must accept any interference received, including interference that may cause undesired operation."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" This device complies with part 15 of the FCC Rules .
Operation is subject to the following two conditions : ( 1 ) This device may not cause harmful interference , and ( 2 ) this device must accept any interference received , including interference that may cause undesired operation .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"This device complies with part 15 of the FCC Rules.
Operation is subject to the following two conditions: (1) This device may not cause harmful interference, and (2) this device must accept any interference received, including interference that may cause undesired operation.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867156</id>
	<title>Sweet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264183200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now it'll be even easier to carjack and rob armored cars.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now it 'll be even easier to carjack and rob armored cars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now it'll be even easier to carjack and rob armored cars.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866204</id>
	<title>Fun to snipe at this gadget...</title>
	<author>John Hasler</author>
	<datestamp>1264172400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...but nothing will actually come of it.  It isn't practical.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...but nothing will actually come of it .
It is n't practical .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...but nothing will actually come of it.
It isn't practical.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865506</id>
	<title>Questions</title>
	<author>tylerni7</author>
	<datestamp>1264166760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have to wonder a few things after seeing that video:
<br> <br>
What happens when a person going 70mph suddenly loses control of their vehicle?
<br>
How accurate can that sort of gun be? Over what sort of angle and distance is it will effective?
<br>
Is there a way to shield the car with a faraday cage to prevent this sort of thing from happening? And if not, wouldn't this just mess up the police cars? What's going to stop the police (or **AA) from "accidentally" frying your computer with one of these?
<br> <br>
This is certainly cool technology that I'd love to get my hands on.. but more info would be nice...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have to wonder a few things after seeing that video : What happens when a person going 70mph suddenly loses control of their vehicle ?
How accurate can that sort of gun be ?
Over what sort of angle and distance is it will effective ?
Is there a way to shield the car with a faraday cage to prevent this sort of thing from happening ?
And if not , would n't this just mess up the police cars ?
What 's going to stop the police ( or * * AA ) from " accidentally " frying your computer with one of these ?
This is certainly cool technology that I 'd love to get my hands on.. but more info would be nice.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have to wonder a few things after seeing that video:
 
What happens when a person going 70mph suddenly loses control of their vehicle?
How accurate can that sort of gun be?
Over what sort of angle and distance is it will effective?
Is there a way to shield the car with a faraday cage to prevent this sort of thing from happening?
And if not, wouldn't this just mess up the police cars?
What's going to stop the police (or **AA) from "accidentally" frying your computer with one of these?
This is certainly cool technology that I'd love to get my hands on.. but more info would be nice...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865896</id>
	<title>Re:Uh-oh...</title>
	<author>peragrin</author>
	<datestamp>1264169580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course it will.  I would rather have the cops use a taser on someone than say beat the crap out of someone with wooden batons to get a drunk to listen to reason and stop driving.</p><p>If the problems with cars electronics is only temporary(pull battery cable off, let system rest, put battery cable on and go) I would rather have cops using this than say following a drunk doing 90 down a street cause the guy can't read the difference on his speed gauge.</p><p>Indeed Police really need a shoot first weapon to diffuse stupid people and still be able to ask them questions later with no real trauma(Taser really isn't it).  will it be abused.  Yep but we can make laws to limit police abuse, we can't make laws that stupid people won't break anyways.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course it will .
I would rather have the cops use a taser on someone than say beat the crap out of someone with wooden batons to get a drunk to listen to reason and stop driving.If the problems with cars electronics is only temporary ( pull battery cable off , let system rest , put battery cable on and go ) I would rather have cops using this than say following a drunk doing 90 down a street cause the guy ca n't read the difference on his speed gauge.Indeed Police really need a shoot first weapon to diffuse stupid people and still be able to ask them questions later with no real trauma ( Taser really is n't it ) .
will it be abused .
Yep but we can make laws to limit police abuse , we ca n't make laws that stupid people wo n't break anyways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course it will.
I would rather have the cops use a taser on someone than say beat the crap out of someone with wooden batons to get a drunk to listen to reason and stop driving.If the problems with cars electronics is only temporary(pull battery cable off, let system rest, put battery cable on and go) I would rather have cops using this than say following a drunk doing 90 down a street cause the guy can't read the difference on his speed gauge.Indeed Police really need a shoot first weapon to diffuse stupid people and still be able to ask them questions later with no real trauma(Taser really isn't it).
will it be abused.
Yep but we can make laws to limit police abuse, we can't make laws that stupid people won't break anyways.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30873970</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264252380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A magnetic pulse will disable a pacemaker and/or defibrillator. For those of us who are pacemaker dependent (It works all the time to replace the electrical system of the heart (or something)) if it shuts down so does the the wearer of the device - it's called DEATH. No way around it if you are pacemaker dependent and this device hits you - bye, bye. Can'r believe they would allow such a device to be marketed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A magnetic pulse will disable a pacemaker and/or defibrillator .
For those of us who are pacemaker dependent ( It works all the time to replace the electrical system of the heart ( or something ) ) if it shuts down so does the the wearer of the device - it 's called DEATH .
No way around it if you are pacemaker dependent and this device hits you - bye , bye .
Can'r believe they would allow such a device to be marketed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A magnetic pulse will disable a pacemaker and/or defibrillator.
For those of us who are pacemaker dependent (It works all the time to replace the electrical system of the heart (or something)) if it shuts down so does the the wearer of the device - it's called DEATH.
No way around it if you are pacemaker dependent and this device hits you - bye, bye.
Can'r believe they would allow such a device to be marketed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867752</id>
	<title>Re:If it's safer than hot pursuit, go for it</title>
	<author>BLKMGK</author>
	<datestamp>1264278900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why would there be no steering or "control"? Hint: turn off your ignition on the highway at 60mph but do not allow it to lock the column. Surprise - car drives fine and decelerates slowly - the brakes still work too....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would there be no steering or " control " ?
Hint : turn off your ignition on the highway at 60mph but do not allow it to lock the column .
Surprise - car drives fine and decelerates slowly - the brakes still work too... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would there be no steering or "control"?
Hint: turn off your ignition on the highway at 60mph but do not allow it to lock the column.
Surprise - car drives fine and decelerates slowly - the brakes still work too....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866654</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865496</id>
	<title>If it's safer than hot pursuit, go for it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264166700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From realpolice.net:<br>In this 9 year period (1994-2002), the data showed that there were 2654 fatal crashes involving 3965 vehicles of which there were 3146 fatalities.  Of these, 1088 were to people not in the fleeing vehicle.</p><p>If frying someone's car results in a better outcome than the above, I'm all for it.</p><p>Sounds like a great replacement for caltrops.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From realpolice.net : In this 9 year period ( 1994-2002 ) , the data showed that there were 2654 fatal crashes involving 3965 vehicles of which there were 3146 fatalities .
Of these , 1088 were to people not in the fleeing vehicle.If frying someone 's car results in a better outcome than the above , I 'm all for it.Sounds like a great replacement for caltrops .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From realpolice.net:In this 9 year period (1994-2002), the data showed that there were 2654 fatal crashes involving 3965 vehicles of which there were 3146 fatalities.
Of these, 1088 were to people not in the fleeing vehicle.If frying someone's car results in a better outcome than the above, I'm all for it.Sounds like a great replacement for caltrops.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30868542</id>
	<title>Re:Uh-oh...</title>
	<author>DrKnark</author>
	<datestamp>1264248900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Reminds me of something I saw on "Cops" which I was surprised was actually shown on TV. The cops were chasing a random drug-dealer or equivalent, during the chase / apprehension he was resisting. Then once the criminal was on the ground and in handcuffs, a female cop was screaming something about "never put your hands on me", and then said to the other cops "let me tase him". Which she did, while reiterating her previous statement.<br> <br>
I'm Swedish, so I'm not sure about laws and practices in the US. But in Sweden it would definitely not be acceptable to intentionally harm a person who is safely in custody, no matter how much they've resisted. I understand that the cop was pissed off at the criminal for resisting so vigorously, but that doesn't seem like a good enough reason. It was surprising to me that this part was on the show.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Reminds me of something I saw on " Cops " which I was surprised was actually shown on TV .
The cops were chasing a random drug-dealer or equivalent , during the chase / apprehension he was resisting .
Then once the criminal was on the ground and in handcuffs , a female cop was screaming something about " never put your hands on me " , and then said to the other cops " let me tase him " .
Which she did , while reiterating her previous statement .
I 'm Swedish , so I 'm not sure about laws and practices in the US .
But in Sweden it would definitely not be acceptable to intentionally harm a person who is safely in custody , no matter how much they 've resisted .
I understand that the cop was pissed off at the criminal for resisting so vigorously , but that does n't seem like a good enough reason .
It was surprising to me that this part was on the show .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reminds me of something I saw on "Cops" which I was surprised was actually shown on TV.
The cops were chasing a random drug-dealer or equivalent, during the chase / apprehension he was resisting.
Then once the criminal was on the ground and in handcuffs, a female cop was screaming something about "never put your hands on me", and then said to the other cops "let me tase him".
Which she did, while reiterating her previous statement.
I'm Swedish, so I'm not sure about laws and practices in the US.
But in Sweden it would definitely not be acceptable to intentionally harm a person who is safely in custody, no matter how much they've resisted.
I understand that the cop was pissed off at the criminal for resisting so vigorously, but that doesn't seem like a good enough reason.
It was surprising to me that this part was on the show.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865910</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30879050</id>
	<title>Also good for...</title>
	<author>kobiashi maru</author>
	<datestamp>1264354200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>if the police officer needs to erase the *you know* off his hard drive, he can do it without going to the trouble of dragging it into the trash.</htmltext>
<tokenext>if the police officer needs to erase the * you know * off his hard drive , he can do it without going to the trouble of dragging it into the trash .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if the police officer needs to erase the *you know* off his hard drive, he can do it without going to the trouble of dragging it into the trash.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30868370</id>
	<title>Will it kill Tasers?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264246320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Please don't EMP me, bro!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Please do n't EMP me , bro !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please don't EMP me, bro!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865598</id>
	<title>Re:Before deployment</title>
	<author>wizardforce</author>
	<datestamp>1264167300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good point.  The electrical leads used in a typical pacemaker may very well be vulnerable to such a pulse.  If the EMP is powerful enough to fry the microprocessor in a car I'd bet that it is also powerful enough to at least temporarily disrupt the function of someone's pacemaker.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good point .
The electrical leads used in a typical pacemaker may very well be vulnerable to such a pulse .
If the EMP is powerful enough to fry the microprocessor in a car I 'd bet that it is also powerful enough to at least temporarily disrupt the function of someone 's pacemaker .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good point.
The electrical leads used in a typical pacemaker may very well be vulnerable to such a pulse.
If the EMP is powerful enough to fry the microprocessor in a car I'd bet that it is also powerful enough to at least temporarily disrupt the function of someone's pacemaker.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30868854</id>
	<title>Re:This is an anti-robot weapon, not anti-car</title>
	<author>JohnnyBGod</author>
	<datestamp>1264253640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You forgot to mention your braking power plummeting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You forgot to mention your braking power plummeting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You forgot to mention your braking power plummeting.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866226</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867862</id>
	<title>Re:Before deployment</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264237680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And on electronic brake pedals some OEMs are thinking about introducing on the market?</p><p>Would be nice to see what happens to a speeding car in a full highway without a functionning brake pedal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And on electronic brake pedals some OEMs are thinking about introducing on the market ? Would be nice to see what happens to a speeding car in a full highway without a functionning brake pedal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And on electronic brake pedals some OEMs are thinking about introducing on the market?Would be nice to see what happens to a speeding car in a full highway without a functionning brake pedal.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30869318</id>
	<title>Re:This is an anti-robot weapon, not anti-car</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264259040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apparently you missed the part where it says that this is intended to stop fleeing criminals. Making the car crash is already the standard (and only way) of stopping them, and considered better than letting the criminal escape or crash on his own into some innocent bystander.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apparently you missed the part where it says that this is intended to stop fleeing criminals .
Making the car crash is already the standard ( and only way ) of stopping them , and considered better than letting the criminal escape or crash on his own into some innocent bystander .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apparently you missed the part where it says that this is intended to stop fleeing criminals.
Making the car crash is already the standard (and only way) of stopping them, and considered better than letting the criminal escape or crash on his own into some innocent bystander.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865856</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867118</id>
	<title>Re:If it's safer than hot pursuit, go for it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264182660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The first time a single mother and her two kids get immobilized by an EMP gun in the middle of nowhere, then are subsequently raped and murdered, I hope you'll eat those words. Without salt.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The first time a single mother and her two kids get immobilized by an EMP gun in the middle of nowhere , then are subsequently raped and murdered , I hope you 'll eat those words .
Without salt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first time a single mother and her two kids get immobilized by an EMP gun in the middle of nowhere, then are subsequently raped and murdered, I hope you'll eat those words.
Without salt.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30872678</id>
	<title>Re:Uh-oh...</title>
	<author>cynyr</author>
	<datestamp>1264242480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd rather my wife be shot than tasered... For the most part the bullet wound is going to be relitivly repairable, her heart stopping from the taser is probably going to do some damage long term, even if they have the defibulator on hand and preped and ready to go. Seeing as the cop doesn't know about her condition by looking at her, I'm willing to bet that the taser would just get whipped out and bam.... Those with heart murmurs or pace makes are likly to suffer quite a bit of trauma from a taser. So in my case it's the fact the cops seem to think they are "safe". Cops get a bad rap because they are seen as overstepping their bounds or "selectively" enforcing. If all of the traffic is speeding but i'm the only one in the 40 cars around me that gets pulled over, that isn't "fair". Also is the cop 100\% sure that is wide angle radar/laser gun only targeted my car? that it was a correct reading? if i want to argue the ticket how much time off work do i need? if it is thrown out does the cop get pay docked to cover my lost wages? Even something like a speeding ticket isn't simple from a human point of view. Also most states have a "obstructing traffic" law, so which law wins? speed limit or slowing down traffic? <br> <br> So i'm in full support of the police doing their jobs, but they(as a group) need to enforce uniformly. Speeding tickets for all speeding or none at all, etc.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd rather my wife be shot than tasered... For the most part the bullet wound is going to be relitivly repairable , her heart stopping from the taser is probably going to do some damage long term , even if they have the defibulator on hand and preped and ready to go .
Seeing as the cop does n't know about her condition by looking at her , I 'm willing to bet that the taser would just get whipped out and bam.... Those with heart murmurs or pace makes are likly to suffer quite a bit of trauma from a taser .
So in my case it 's the fact the cops seem to think they are " safe " .
Cops get a bad rap because they are seen as overstepping their bounds or " selectively " enforcing .
If all of the traffic is speeding but i 'm the only one in the 40 cars around me that gets pulled over , that is n't " fair " .
Also is the cop 100 \ % sure that is wide angle radar/laser gun only targeted my car ?
that it was a correct reading ?
if i want to argue the ticket how much time off work do i need ?
if it is thrown out does the cop get pay docked to cover my lost wages ?
Even something like a speeding ticket is n't simple from a human point of view .
Also most states have a " obstructing traffic " law , so which law wins ?
speed limit or slowing down traffic ?
So i 'm in full support of the police doing their jobs , but they ( as a group ) need to enforce uniformly .
Speeding tickets for all speeding or none at all , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd rather my wife be shot than tasered... For the most part the bullet wound is going to be relitivly repairable, her heart stopping from the taser is probably going to do some damage long term, even if they have the defibulator on hand and preped and ready to go.
Seeing as the cop doesn't know about her condition by looking at her, I'm willing to bet that the taser would just get whipped out and bam.... Those with heart murmurs or pace makes are likly to suffer quite a bit of trauma from a taser.
So in my case it's the fact the cops seem to think they are "safe".
Cops get a bad rap because they are seen as overstepping their bounds or "selectively" enforcing.
If all of the traffic is speeding but i'm the only one in the 40 cars around me that gets pulled over, that isn't "fair".
Also is the cop 100\% sure that is wide angle radar/laser gun only targeted my car?
that it was a correct reading?
if i want to argue the ticket how much time off work do i need?
if it is thrown out does the cop get pay docked to cover my lost wages?
Even something like a speeding ticket isn't simple from a human point of view.
Also most states have a "obstructing traffic" law, so which law wins?
speed limit or slowing down traffic?
So i'm in full support of the police doing their jobs, but they(as a group) need to enforce uniformly.
Speeding tickets for all speeding or none at all, etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865910</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866428</id>
	<title>loss of power steering / brakes can be very bad an</title>
	<author>Joe The Dragon</author>
	<datestamp>1264175100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>loss of power steering / brakes can be very bad that is why stop sicks are better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>loss of power steering / brakes can be very bad that is why stop sicks are better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>loss of power steering / brakes can be very bad that is why stop sicks are better.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867210</id>
	<title>USAF seeks airborne car-zapper</title>
	<author>drew30319</author>
	<datestamp>1264183800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The contrarian in me read TFA and eventually found the source article:<p>

<a href="http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2010/01/usaf-seeks-airborne-car-zapper.html" title="flightglobal.com">http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2010/01/usaf-seeks-airborne-car-zapper.html</a> [flightglobal.com]
</p><p>
Apparently it's the Air Force that's interested in such a device, which would be used from the air, not via police car.</p><blockquote><div><p>"The Air Force Air Armament Center (AAC), 308th Armament Systems Wing, Rapid Acquisition Cell is seeking information that could lead to development of an air-delivered capability to disable moving ground vehicles while minimizing harm to occupants. Development schedule is expected to be a critical factor in any potential development effort, so responses should focus on feasibility and maturity of the key technologies. Responses should include candidate integration concepts which take maximum advantage of existing infrastructure in order to minimize cost and development time."</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
And since I bothered posting I guess I'll add that the comparison to the On-Star solution is bizarre.  Obviously the On-Star approach has nothing to do with EMP but instead is a command sent to the on-board computer via satellite.  I suppose it's comparable in that both solutions involve things above us adversely affecting motor vehicles (and to that extent I guess it's also like a traffic jam caused by drivers looking at the Goodyear blimp).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The contrarian in me read TFA and eventually found the source article : http : //www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2010/01/usaf-seeks-airborne-car-zapper.html [ flightglobal.com ] Apparently it 's the Air Force that 's interested in such a device , which would be used from the air , not via police car .
" The Air Force Air Armament Center ( AAC ) , 308th Armament Systems Wing , Rapid Acquisition Cell is seeking information that could lead to development of an air-delivered capability to disable moving ground vehicles while minimizing harm to occupants .
Development schedule is expected to be a critical factor in any potential development effort , so responses should focus on feasibility and maturity of the key technologies .
Responses should include candidate integration concepts which take maximum advantage of existing infrastructure in order to minimize cost and development time .
" And since I bothered posting I guess I 'll add that the comparison to the On-Star solution is bizarre .
Obviously the On-Star approach has nothing to do with EMP but instead is a command sent to the on-board computer via satellite .
I suppose it 's comparable in that both solutions involve things above us adversely affecting motor vehicles ( and to that extent I guess it 's also like a traffic jam caused by drivers looking at the Goodyear blimp ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The contrarian in me read TFA and eventually found the source article:

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2010/01/usaf-seeks-airborne-car-zapper.html [flightglobal.com]

Apparently it's the Air Force that's interested in such a device, which would be used from the air, not via police car.
"The Air Force Air Armament Center (AAC), 308th Armament Systems Wing, Rapid Acquisition Cell is seeking information that could lead to development of an air-delivered capability to disable moving ground vehicles while minimizing harm to occupants.
Development schedule is expected to be a critical factor in any potential development effort, so responses should focus on feasibility and maturity of the key technologies.
Responses should include candidate integration concepts which take maximum advantage of existing infrastructure in order to minimize cost and development time.
"

And since I bothered posting I guess I'll add that the comparison to the On-Star solution is bizarre.
Obviously the On-Star approach has nothing to do with EMP but instead is a command sent to the on-board computer via satellite.
I suppose it's comparable in that both solutions involve things above us adversely affecting motor vehicles (and to that extent I guess it's also like a traffic jam caused by drivers looking at the Goodyear blimp).
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866414</id>
	<title>One big question...</title>
	<author>joocemann</author>
	<datestamp>1264174980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How much will they cost?  How many cars do they plan to put them in?  Does this make any economical sense as compared to the benefit?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How much will they cost ?
How many cars do they plan to put them in ?
Does this make any economical sense as compared to the benefit ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How much will they cost?
How many cars do they plan to put them in?
Does this make any economical sense as compared to the benefit?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866588</id>
	<title>Thats gotta be one HELLUVA battery...</title>
	<author>MindPrison</author>
	<datestamp>1264177020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...and picture this:</p><p>Cop1: There he is, fire'er up!</p><p>Cop2: Steady....steeeaady.... BZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!!!</p><p>Cop1: Damn, you missed, good going - now our battery is depleted, and the chase is over!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...and picture this : Cop1 : There he is , fire'er up ! Cop2 : Steady....steeeaady... .
BZZZZZZZZZZZZZ ! ! ! Cop1 : Damn , you missed , good going - now our battery is depleted , and the chase is over !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and picture this:Cop1: There he is, fire'er up!Cop2: Steady....steeeaady....
BZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!!!Cop1: Damn, you missed, good going - now our battery is depleted, and the chase is over!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866496</id>
	<title>Re:OnStar not EMP</title>
	<author>jklovanc</author>
	<datestamp>1264175640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And OnStar is not satellite communications; it works off the cellular network. I worked for a small company that tracked and was able to disable (turn off ignition and lock doors) for an exotic car rental company. Slowing down the vehicle was done by cycling the ignition on and off. This has been done for years on bait cars.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And OnStar is not satellite communications ; it works off the cellular network .
I worked for a small company that tracked and was able to disable ( turn off ignition and lock doors ) for an exotic car rental company .
Slowing down the vehicle was done by cycling the ignition on and off .
This has been done for years on bait cars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And OnStar is not satellite communications; it works off the cellular network.
I worked for a small company that tracked and was able to disable (turn off ignition and lock doors) for an exotic car rental company.
Slowing down the vehicle was done by cycling the ignition on and off.
This has been done for years on bait cars.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865492</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866198</id>
	<title>emp facts</title>
	<author>luther349</author>
	<datestamp>1264172280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>a emp blast on a car will not damage the car. it will stall it. but the car will run again when the emp is shut down. only magentic storage like a pc hdd can be permenty whiped by one. cars dont use hard-drives thow normal rom chips for the cpu.it will disrupt not damage. emp blast on cars have been tested on the past guy blast car with emp gun car stalls car restarts and drives off. of course in a high speed chase stalling out the car for a few mints is all they need.in essence crashing that cars computer but once you restart the computer it can run again. you radio wont be effected btw. studys on this where done heavly on what would happon if there was a nucler blast and what the emp effect would actually be.of course most movies dnt use fact its just more drama to have every car die. also a old car whont be effected at all being they are not computer controlled.</htmltext>
<tokenext>a emp blast on a car will not damage the car .
it will stall it .
but the car will run again when the emp is shut down .
only magentic storage like a pc hdd can be permenty whiped by one .
cars dont use hard-drives thow normal rom chips for the cpu.it will disrupt not damage .
emp blast on cars have been tested on the past guy blast car with emp gun car stalls car restarts and drives off .
of course in a high speed chase stalling out the car for a few mints is all they need.in essence crashing that cars computer but once you restart the computer it can run again .
you radio wont be effected btw .
studys on this where done heavly on what would happon if there was a nucler blast and what the emp effect would actually be.of course most movies dnt use fact its just more drama to have every car die .
also a old car whont be effected at all being they are not computer controlled .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>a emp blast on a car will not damage the car.
it will stall it.
but the car will run again when the emp is shut down.
only magentic storage like a pc hdd can be permenty whiped by one.
cars dont use hard-drives thow normal rom chips for the cpu.it will disrupt not damage.
emp blast on cars have been tested on the past guy blast car with emp gun car stalls car restarts and drives off.
of course in a high speed chase stalling out the car for a few mints is all they need.in essence crashing that cars computer but once you restart the computer it can run again.
you radio wont be effected btw.
studys on this where done heavly on what would happon if there was a nucler blast and what the emp effect would actually be.of course most movies dnt use fact its just more drama to have every car die.
also a old car whont be effected at all being they are not computer controlled.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866266</id>
	<title>Overkill</title>
	<author>LostCluster</author>
	<datestamp>1264173060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Good news, we've recovered your car and caught the person driving it. Bad news, we broke your car's computer in order to do it."</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Good news , we 've recovered your car and caught the person driving it .
Bad news , we broke your car 's computer in order to do it .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Good news, we've recovered your car and caught the person driving it.
Bad news, we broke your car's computer in order to do it.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866262</id>
	<title>Re:Uh-oh...</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1264173060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That whole &ldquo;doesn&rsquo;t kill&rdquo; idea, is just *wrong*.</p><p>As if killing would be the worst case possible.<br>It&rsquo;s not. By far.<br>There are <em>much</em> worse things.</p><p>Like becoming a drooling retard in a wheelchair, after the needle shocked right into your spinal nerves!<br>I&rsquo;d rather be shot.</p><p>Besides: Contrary to popular belief, gun shots do not have to be lethal at all!<br>A small bullet in a leg muscle is far less bad than a taser in your central nervous system.<br>Of course there are even less bad systems. A couple of ropes, around the legs. A net thrown over someone. Foam that gets hard.<br>All simple, non lethal, not even painful, methods to stop someone quickly and effectively.<br>There are thousands of methods.</p><p>I&rsquo;ll go out and say, that the only reason, tasers are more popular, is that it satisfies the perverse sadistic needs of the average cop / security guy / blackwater murderer / soldier. You know. Those types that don&rsquo;t do it to do good, but because of the&ldquo;fun&rdquo; of legally hurting others. Those types that pull every good cop into their dirt.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That whole    doesn    t kill    idea , is just * wrong * .As if killing would be the worst case possible.It    s not .
By far.There are much worse things.Like becoming a drooling retard in a wheelchair , after the needle shocked right into your spinal nerves ! I    d rather be shot.Besides : Contrary to popular belief , gun shots do not have to be lethal at all ! A small bullet in a leg muscle is far less bad than a taser in your central nervous system.Of course there are even less bad systems .
A couple of ropes , around the legs .
A net thrown over someone .
Foam that gets hard.All simple , non lethal , not even painful , methods to stop someone quickly and effectively.There are thousands of methods.I    ll go out and say , that the only reason , tasers are more popular , is that it satisfies the perverse sadistic needs of the average cop / security guy / blackwater murderer / soldier .
You know .
Those types that don    t do it to do good , but because of the    fun    of legally hurting others .
Those types that pull every good cop into their dirt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That whole “doesn’t kill” idea, is just *wrong*.As if killing would be the worst case possible.It’s not.
By far.There are much worse things.Like becoming a drooling retard in a wheelchair, after the needle shocked right into your spinal nerves!I’d rather be shot.Besides: Contrary to popular belief, gun shots do not have to be lethal at all!A small bullet in a leg muscle is far less bad than a taser in your central nervous system.Of course there are even less bad systems.
A couple of ropes, around the legs.
A net thrown over someone.
Foam that gets hard.All simple, non lethal, not even painful, methods to stop someone quickly and effectively.There are thousands of methods.I’ll go out and say, that the only reason, tasers are more popular, is that it satisfies the perverse sadistic needs of the average cop / security guy / blackwater murderer / soldier.
You know.
Those types that don’t do it to do good, but because of the“fun” of legally hurting others.
Those types that pull every good cop into their dirt.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866626</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting choice of wording</title>
	<author>pnewhook</author>
	<datestamp>1264177620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>then its high time victims start suing the criminals for the damage caused, instead of suing the police.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>then its high time victims start suing the criminals for the damage caused , instead of suing the police .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>then its high time victims start suing the criminals for the damage caused, instead of suing the police.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865498</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865818</id>
	<title>Dupe</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264168920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I do believe this is a dupe.  I seem to recall a article about this device from months and months ago.  Someone who cares more can dig for it if they want to, I won't bother seeing as the search capability here on slashdot blows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do believe this is a dupe .
I seem to recall a article about this device from months and months ago .
Someone who cares more can dig for it if they want to , I wo n't bother seeing as the search capability here on slashdot blows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do believe this is a dupe.
I seem to recall a article about this device from months and months ago.
Someone who cares more can dig for it if they want to, I won't bother seeing as the search capability here on slashdot blows.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866796</id>
	<title>As usual ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264179360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... no one has considered that not all vehicles are cars.  The first time this device disables a motorcycle which is leaned into a turn, whether or not the bike was the target, there will likely be a dead or severely injured motorcyclist whose family will win the lawsuit jackpot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... no one has considered that not all vehicles are cars .
The first time this device disables a motorcycle which is leaned into a turn , whether or not the bike was the target , there will likely be a dead or severely injured motorcyclist whose family will win the lawsuit jackpot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... no one has considered that not all vehicles are cars.
The first time this device disables a motorcycle which is leaned into a turn, whether or not the bike was the target, there will likely be a dead or severely injured motorcyclist whose family will win the lawsuit jackpot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30868834</id>
	<title>Cry me a river</title>
	<author>SmallFurryCreature</author>
	<datestamp>1264253220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So now we got to worry about a tool to stop criminals because it might kill them. Better recall police guns then, people could get hurt if you shoot them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So now we got to worry about a tool to stop criminals because it might kill them .
Better recall police guns then , people could get hurt if you shoot them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So now we got to worry about a tool to stop criminals because it might kill them.
Better recall police guns then, people could get hurt if you shoot them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30873052</id>
	<title>Microwave Jam</title>
	<author>Matheus</author>
	<datestamp>1264245300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't believe no one has mentioned Knight Rider yet... "KITT!  Try using microwave jam to stop their vehicle!"</p><p>Bah.  I bet this one won't even make the cool sound!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't believe no one has mentioned Knight Rider yet... " KITT ! Try using microwave jam to stop their vehicle ! " Bah .
I bet this one wo n't even make the cool sound !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't believe no one has mentioned Knight Rider yet... "KITT!  Try using microwave jam to stop their vehicle!"Bah.
I bet this one won't even make the cool sound!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865792</id>
	<title>Re:Onstar?</title>
	<author>shadow169</author>
	<datestamp>1264168740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>How the heck is this similar to the Onstar system? This uses a directed EMP to disrupt electronic engine control, Onstar uses a built-in remote kill switch.  That's like saying shooting a lightbulb is the same as turning off the switch.</p></div><p> And you would be correct if your intent is to make the room dark.  This system is like onstar in that both stop a vehicle remotely.</p></div><p>Except that this is Slashdot, "news for nerds", not "news for people who only want the high level concepts".  I agree with the gp.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How the heck is this similar to the Onstar system ?
This uses a directed EMP to disrupt electronic engine control , Onstar uses a built-in remote kill switch .
That 's like saying shooting a lightbulb is the same as turning off the switch .
And you would be correct if your intent is to make the room dark .
This system is like onstar in that both stop a vehicle remotely.Except that this is Slashdot , " news for nerds " , not " news for people who only want the high level concepts " .
I agree with the gp .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How the heck is this similar to the Onstar system?
This uses a directed EMP to disrupt electronic engine control, Onstar uses a built-in remote kill switch.
That's like saying shooting a lightbulb is the same as turning off the switch.
And you would be correct if your intent is to make the room dark.
This system is like onstar in that both stop a vehicle remotely.Except that this is Slashdot, "news for nerds", not "news for people who only want the high level concepts".
I agree with the gp.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30874452</id>
	<title>Don't forget the environment!!!!!</title>
	<author>freaker\_TuC</author>
	<datestamp>1264256880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Use a hammer instead<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. throw it and yell "FIRE IN THE HOLE"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. works every time to turn off your light without any environmental impact.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Use a hammer instead .. throw it and yell " FIRE IN THE HOLE " .. works every time to turn off your light without any environmental impact .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Use a hammer instead .. throw it and yell "FIRE IN THE HOLE" .. works every time to turn off your light without any environmental impact.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865608</id>
	<title>..and speaking of OnStar:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264167420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is the #1 reason why you should NOT ever had OnStar in your car. Ever. Not even for free. You do NOT need any 3rd party being able to disable your car, let alone be able to monitor where you are and the conversations going on inside your car. If you have OnStar, stop paying for it, find all the antennas associated with the system and cut the leads, preferably shorting them out in the process.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is the # 1 reason why you should NOT ever had OnStar in your car .
Ever. Not even for free .
You do NOT need any 3rd party being able to disable your car , let alone be able to monitor where you are and the conversations going on inside your car .
If you have OnStar , stop paying for it , find all the antennas associated with the system and cut the leads , preferably shorting them out in the process .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is the #1 reason why you should NOT ever had OnStar in your car.
Ever. Not even for free.
You do NOT need any 3rd party being able to disable your car, let alone be able to monitor where you are and the conversations going on inside your car.
If you have OnStar, stop paying for it, find all the antennas associated with the system and cut the leads, preferably shorting them out in the process.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866146</id>
	<title>Re:This is an anti-robot weapon, not anti-car</title>
	<author>easyTree</author>
	<datestamp>1264171680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Would an EMP-pulse disable an airbag-release system?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Would an EMP-pulse disable an airbag-release system ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Would an EMP-pulse disable an airbag-release system?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865856</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867152</id>
	<title>Re:This is an anti-robot weapon, not anti-car</title>
	<author>Ranzear</author>
	<datestamp>1264183140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It would actually be more likely to <i>trigger</i> it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It would actually be more likely to trigger it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would actually be more likely to trigger it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866544</id>
	<title>Re:What a great tool for robbery!</title>
	<author>the\_fat\_kid</author>
	<datestamp>1264176420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and think of the get-away opportunities.<br>you would be unstoppable.<br>Cop cars, helicopters, Knight-boat. All useless.<br>Unless they came after you in Diesel VWs.<br>and that sight alone might be worth getting caught...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and think of the get-away opportunities.you would be unstoppable.Cop cars , helicopters , Knight-boat .
All useless.Unless they came after you in Diesel VWs.and that sight alone might be worth getting caught.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and think of the get-away opportunities.you would be unstoppable.Cop cars, helicopters, Knight-boat.
All useless.Unless they came after you in Diesel VWs.and that sight alone might be worth getting caught...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865586</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865720</id>
	<title>Probably won't kill anything</title>
	<author>mbessey</author>
	<datestamp>1264168320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Automotive electronics are fairly tough, because of the noisy environment they operate in. I would bet that in the typical case, the voltage pulse just confuses the computer, and/or latches a few inputs, causing it to shut down. You could likely start it right back up afterward.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Automotive electronics are fairly tough , because of the noisy environment they operate in .
I would bet that in the typical case , the voltage pulse just confuses the computer , and/or latches a few inputs , causing it to shut down .
You could likely start it right back up afterward .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Automotive electronics are fairly tough, because of the noisy environment they operate in.
I would bet that in the typical case, the voltage pulse just confuses the computer, and/or latches a few inputs, causing it to shut down.
You could likely start it right back up afterward.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865498</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866280</id>
	<title>Re:OnStar not EMP</title>
	<author>LostCluster</author>
	<datestamp>1264173240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yep... and it's much easier to require all new cars to honor a disabling radio code than it is to have this kind of system. This is technology we don't really need developed, but since the police have tax dollars....</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep... and it 's much easier to require all new cars to honor a disabling radio code than it is to have this kind of system .
This is technology we do n't really need developed , but since the police have tax dollars... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep... and it's much easier to require all new cars to honor a disabling radio code than it is to have this kind of system.
This is technology we don't really need developed, but since the police have tax dollars....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865492</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865848</id>
	<title>Re:Questions</title>
	<author>peragrin</author>
	<datestamp>1264169100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Same thing that happens now if your engine quits suddenly at 70mph, you slow don fairly quickly while at the same  time lose power sterring.  However if your going 70mph your going in a mostly straight line anyways.  Unless your dumb enough to go 70 down city streets.  worst case is you crash going a lot slower than70 mph.</p><p>Distance unknown however it will probably be like a spot light in it's target area a spot probably about 10 meters wide at most.</p><p>nope, only if it hits them too, we shall find out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Same thing that happens now if your engine quits suddenly at 70mph , you slow don fairly quickly while at the same time lose power sterring .
However if your going 70mph your going in a mostly straight line anyways .
Unless your dumb enough to go 70 down city streets .
worst case is you crash going a lot slower than70 mph.Distance unknown however it will probably be like a spot light in it 's target area a spot probably about 10 meters wide at most.nope , only if it hits them too , we shall find out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same thing that happens now if your engine quits suddenly at 70mph, you slow don fairly quickly while at the same  time lose power sterring.
However if your going 70mph your going in a mostly straight line anyways.
Unless your dumb enough to go 70 down city streets.
worst case is you crash going a lot slower than70 mph.Distance unknown however it will probably be like a spot light in it's target area a spot probably about 10 meters wide at most.nope, only if it hits them too, we shall find out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865506</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865492</id>
	<title>OnStar not EMP</title>
	<author>bughunter</author>
	<datestamp>1264166700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Um.  The electromagnetic signal that can be sent from a satellite to an OnStar-equipped vehicle is certainly not any form of an electromagnetic pulse.  It's a radio signal encoded with a command telling a microprocessor to disable power to the ignition.</p><p>Who writes this mess?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Um .
The electromagnetic signal that can be sent from a satellite to an OnStar-equipped vehicle is certainly not any form of an electromagnetic pulse .
It 's a radio signal encoded with a command telling a microprocessor to disable power to the ignition.Who writes this mess ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um.
The electromagnetic signal that can be sent from a satellite to an OnStar-equipped vehicle is certainly not any form of an electromagnetic pulse.
It's a radio signal encoded with a command telling a microprocessor to disable power to the ignition.Who writes this mess?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867772</id>
	<title>Well F* them</title>
	<author>DarkOx</author>
	<datestamp>1264279020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good luck trying this on me my twin Weber 40DCOEs.  They can throw all the EMP at my all alloy twin cam hemi and I expect I will keep running just fine thank you very much.  Computers don't belong in cars!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good luck trying this on me my twin Weber 40DCOEs .
They can throw all the EMP at my all alloy twin cam hemi and I expect I will keep running just fine thank you very much .
Computers do n't belong in cars !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good luck trying this on me my twin Weber 40DCOEs.
They can throw all the EMP at my all alloy twin cam hemi and I expect I will keep running just fine thank you very much.
Computers don't belong in cars!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865446</id>
	<title>Before deployment</title>
	<author>Vinegar Joe</author>
	<datestamp>1264166340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder if they'll test it on Pacemakers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder if they 'll test it on Pacemakers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder if they'll test it on Pacemakers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866654</id>
	<title>Re:If it's safer than hot pursuit, go for it</title>
	<author>shadowbearer</author>
	<datestamp>1264177920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
&nbsp; Yeah. Then they start frying cars while in a high speed chase, the car goes completely out of control (no power steering or control of any kind at 100 mph); more dead bystanders.</p><p>
&nbsp; How, exactly, is this a better solution? At least with caltrops the driver still has *some* control over the car, and presumably doesn't want to die.</p><p>SB</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>  Yeah .
Then they start frying cars while in a high speed chase , the car goes completely out of control ( no power steering or control of any kind at 100 mph ) ; more dead bystanders .
  How , exactly , is this a better solution ?
At least with caltrops the driver still has * some * control over the car , and presumably does n't want to die.SB</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
  Yeah.
Then they start frying cars while in a high speed chase, the car goes completely out of control (no power steering or control of any kind at 100 mph); more dead bystanders.
  How, exactly, is this a better solution?
At least with caltrops the driver still has *some* control over the car, and presumably doesn't want to die.SB</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866994</id>
	<title>Re:If it's safer than hot pursuit, go for it</title>
	<author>bdowd</author>
	<datestamp>1264181460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A better idea is to federally mandate that privately owned vehicles be limited to four mph. Additionally drivers and passengers<br>must be wrapped in Michelin (tm) tire suits to minimize accidental trauma.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A better idea is to federally mandate that privately owned vehicles be limited to four mph .
Additionally drivers and passengersmust be wrapped in Michelin ( tm ) tire suits to minimize accidental trauma .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A better idea is to federally mandate that privately owned vehicles be limited to four mph.
Additionally drivers and passengersmust be wrapped in Michelin (tm) tire suits to minimize accidental trauma.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865594</id>
	<title>Re:Onstar?</title>
	<author>donaggie03</author>
	<datestamp>1264167300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How the heck is this similar to the Onstar system? This uses a directed EMP to disrupt electronic engine control, Onstar uses a built-in remote kill switch.  That's like saying shooting a lightbulb is the same as turning off the switch.</p></div><p> And you would be correct if your intent is to make the room dark.  This system is like onstar in that both stop a vehicle remotely.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How the heck is this similar to the Onstar system ?
This uses a directed EMP to disrupt electronic engine control , Onstar uses a built-in remote kill switch .
That 's like saying shooting a lightbulb is the same as turning off the switch .
And you would be correct if your intent is to make the room dark .
This system is like onstar in that both stop a vehicle remotely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How the heck is this similar to the Onstar system?
This uses a directed EMP to disrupt electronic engine control, Onstar uses a built-in remote kill switch.
That's like saying shooting a lightbulb is the same as turning off the switch.
And you would be correct if your intent is to make the room dark.
This system is like onstar in that both stop a vehicle remotely.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30869870</id>
	<title>Re:If it's safer than hot pursuit, go for it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264264440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And out of those fatal crashes, what was the crime that the suspect committed that warranted taking up a high speed and potentially lethal chase?</p><p>Unless they are chasing someone who is en route to committing a crime, the deed is done...follow them with a helicopter or do some police work.  Don't go driving over sidewalks at 50+ MPH because some dude robbed an insured bank of a few hundred dollars.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And out of those fatal crashes , what was the crime that the suspect committed that warranted taking up a high speed and potentially lethal chase ? Unless they are chasing someone who is en route to committing a crime , the deed is done...follow them with a helicopter or do some police work .
Do n't go driving over sidewalks at 50 + MPH because some dude robbed an insured bank of a few hundred dollars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And out of those fatal crashes, what was the crime that the suspect committed that warranted taking up a high speed and potentially lethal chase?Unless they are chasing someone who is en route to committing a crime, the deed is done...follow them with a helicopter or do some police work.
Don't go driving over sidewalks at 50+ MPH because some dude robbed an insured bank of a few hundred dollars.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867314</id>
	<title>lol</title>
	<author>Charliemopps</author>
	<datestamp>1264185540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>How long do you think it will take for some disgruntled cop to point one of these at his ex-wives plane on take-off?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How long do you think it will take for some disgruntled cop to point one of these at his ex-wives plane on take-off ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How long do you think it will take for some disgruntled cop to point one of these at his ex-wives plane on take-off?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865854</id>
	<title>unsafe in the extreme.</title>
	<author>timmarhy</author>
	<datestamp>1264169160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm all for giving police more tools to use against crooks, however there is a glaring fault with this proposal - disabling the car also means loss of control. so if you have a police chase and the cops use this thing, suddenly the only thing driving the car is it's own momentum which makes it more dangerous then the criminal driving it since he atleast still wants to live, and so will try avoid on comming traffic.<p>
this is even worse then road spikes since taking out the tyres atleast slows the vehicle down a lot. this thing could only be used after the cops have blocked off traffic and there's no chance of the car running into anything.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm all for giving police more tools to use against crooks , however there is a glaring fault with this proposal - disabling the car also means loss of control .
so if you have a police chase and the cops use this thing , suddenly the only thing driving the car is it 's own momentum which makes it more dangerous then the criminal driving it since he atleast still wants to live , and so will try avoid on comming traffic .
this is even worse then road spikes since taking out the tyres atleast slows the vehicle down a lot .
this thing could only be used after the cops have blocked off traffic and there 's no chance of the car running into anything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm all for giving police more tools to use against crooks, however there is a glaring fault with this proposal - disabling the car also means loss of control.
so if you have a police chase and the cops use this thing, suddenly the only thing driving the car is it's own momentum which makes it more dangerous then the criminal driving it since he atleast still wants to live, and so will try avoid on comming traffic.
this is even worse then road spikes since taking out the tyres atleast slows the vehicle down a lot.
this thing could only be used after the cops have blocked off traffic and there's no chance of the car running into anything.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865548</id>
	<title>This is an anti-robot weapon, not anti-car</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264166940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Using it on a car sounds really REALLY stupid.
<p>
1.  It will kill the car, not merely create a carefully programmed disabling like the Onstar system.  Most likely this leads to a car crash and quite likely require complete replacement of all electronics.
</p><p>2.  As others stated, pacemakers, watches, cellphones, laptops, etc. will also be affected.
</p><p>3.  This will get into the hands of criminals.  I am quite frankly they don't already have it.  Here are some of the things I think people might use it on:
</p><p>ATM's  If there is a 1 in 100 chance of it malfunctioning and spitting out the money, then ATM's will be hit 100 times.
</p><p>Toll machines - obvious
</p><p>Red lights (and the cameras aimed at them).
</p><p>cop cars</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Using it on a car sounds really REALLY stupid .
1. It will kill the car , not merely create a carefully programmed disabling like the Onstar system .
Most likely this leads to a car crash and quite likely require complete replacement of all electronics .
2. As others stated , pacemakers , watches , cellphones , laptops , etc .
will also be affected .
3. This will get into the hands of criminals .
I am quite frankly they do n't already have it .
Here are some of the things I think people might use it on : ATM 's If there is a 1 in 100 chance of it malfunctioning and spitting out the money , then ATM 's will be hit 100 times .
Toll machines - obvious Red lights ( and the cameras aimed at them ) .
cop cars</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Using it on a car sounds really REALLY stupid.
1.  It will kill the car, not merely create a carefully programmed disabling like the Onstar system.
Most likely this leads to a car crash and quite likely require complete replacement of all electronics.
2.  As others stated, pacemakers, watches, cellphones, laptops, etc.
will also be affected.
3.  This will get into the hands of criminals.
I am quite frankly they don't already have it.
Here are some of the things I think people might use it on:
ATM's  If there is a 1 in 100 chance of it malfunctioning and spitting out the money, then ATM's will be hit 100 times.
Toll machines - obvious
Red lights (and the cameras aimed at them).
cop cars</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30868160</id>
	<title>Re:"I wonder if they'll test it on Pacemakers."</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264242720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But they unintentionally tested it on the video camera they were using and it kept working perfectly...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But they unintentionally tested it on the video camera they were using and it kept working perfectly.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But they unintentionally tested it on the video camera they were using and it kept working perfectly...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865536</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865750</id>
	<title>Re:OnStar not EMP</title>
	<author>BikeHelmet</author>
	<datestamp>1264168560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's still dangerous, though. I'm surprised it's tolerated in a country where so many refuse to give up their guns, for fear the government will go mad with power.</p><p>Can't give up your guns, but giving up mobility is fine?</p><p>I wonder what'll happen when someone cracks it and starts broadcasting a signal to shut down all the GM cars?</p><p>I'll stick with my 20 year old Toyota. As long as I stick gas in it, it continues to pur.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's still dangerous , though .
I 'm surprised it 's tolerated in a country where so many refuse to give up their guns , for fear the government will go mad with power.Ca n't give up your guns , but giving up mobility is fine ? I wonder what 'll happen when someone cracks it and starts broadcasting a signal to shut down all the GM cars ? I 'll stick with my 20 year old Toyota .
As long as I stick gas in it , it continues to pur .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's still dangerous, though.
I'm surprised it's tolerated in a country where so many refuse to give up their guns, for fear the government will go mad with power.Can't give up your guns, but giving up mobility is fine?I wonder what'll happen when someone cracks it and starts broadcasting a signal to shut down all the GM cars?I'll stick with my 20 year old Toyota.
As long as I stick gas in it, it continues to pur.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865492</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30900956</id>
	<title>Disabling a car</title>
	<author>ps2os2</author>
	<datestamp>1264448640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Disabling a car is a decent idea. One that should have come to reality years ago (before the police video camera and TV looking on).</p><p>One issue I have with this though. We have enough rogue cops tasering old ladies. Since the courts seems to have looked the other way I wonder how many stories we are going to get with cops using this for catching their  wives boyfriends while fleeing?<br>Too bad we cannot trust cops to use good judgement anymore.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Disabling a car is a decent idea .
One that should have come to reality years ago ( before the police video camera and TV looking on ) .One issue I have with this though .
We have enough rogue cops tasering old ladies .
Since the courts seems to have looked the other way I wonder how many stories we are going to get with cops using this for catching their wives boyfriends while fleeing ? Too bad we can not trust cops to use good judgement anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Disabling a car is a decent idea.
One that should have come to reality years ago (before the police video camera and TV looking on).One issue I have with this though.
We have enough rogue cops tasering old ladies.
Since the courts seems to have looked the other way I wonder how many stories we are going to get with cops using this for catching their  wives boyfriends while fleeing?Too bad we cannot trust cops to use good judgement anymore.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867414</id>
	<title>Re:"I wonder if they'll test it on Pacemakers."</title>
	<author>digsbo</author>
	<datestamp>1264187280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's already becoming illegal to fortify your home against invasion.  The justification is that no one who's not doing something illegal has a reason to fear no-knock forced entry from the police/ATF/FBI/DHS.
<p>http://www.tulsabeacon.com/?p=3269</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's already becoming illegal to fortify your home against invasion .
The justification is that no one who 's not doing something illegal has a reason to fear no-knock forced entry from the police/ATF/FBI/DHS .
http : //www.tulsabeacon.com/ ? p = 3269</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's already becoming illegal to fortify your home against invasion.
The justification is that no one who's not doing something illegal has a reason to fear no-knock forced entry from the police/ATF/FBI/DHS.
http://www.tulsabeacon.com/?p=3269</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865536</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865864</id>
	<title>Re:I can't wait...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264169220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I remember reading an article on something similiar years ago, and some guy built a prototype that fit into a normal suit case. It was basically a pulse equal to a decent FM station all powered in one direction. It was a very short, strong pulse that disabled at car from something like 50 feet</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember reading an article on something similiar years ago , and some guy built a prototype that fit into a normal suit case .
It was basically a pulse equal to a decent FM station all powered in one direction .
It was a very short , strong pulse that disabled at car from something like 50 feet</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember reading an article on something similiar years ago, and some guy built a prototype that fit into a normal suit case.
It was basically a pulse equal to a decent FM station all powered in one direction.
It was a very short, strong pulse that disabled at car from something like 50 feet</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865460</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866606</id>
	<title>And GM wonders why they can't sell</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264177320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
I grew up buying Chevies.  So did my family.  GM cars had practically become a religious tradition in our family until a few years ago.
</p><p>
When On-Star appeared, my first thought was, "I'll only buy the lower end models without it".  Then GM made it standard.
</p><p>
I'm sorry, but I'm not going to BUY a car that helps big brother track my whereabouts and allows him to remotely disable my vehicle.  The fact that they would do something like this sends a very strong, very clear message the company is anti-American.  They just don't get this "freedom" thing the Bible-belt takes so seriously.  And as if to add insult to injury, they're cars are now more expensive - in some cases by as much as $20k - than their Japanese counterparts.
</p><p>
Who do they think they're kidding?  Does it really surprise anyone that GM is going bankrupt?
</p><p>
It's a FREEDOM thing, GM - you wouldn't understand.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I grew up buying Chevies .
So did my family .
GM cars had practically become a religious tradition in our family until a few years ago .
When On-Star appeared , my first thought was , " I 'll only buy the lower end models without it " .
Then GM made it standard .
I 'm sorry , but I 'm not going to BUY a car that helps big brother track my whereabouts and allows him to remotely disable my vehicle .
The fact that they would do something like this sends a very strong , very clear message the company is anti-American .
They just do n't get this " freedom " thing the Bible-belt takes so seriously .
And as if to add insult to injury , they 're cars are now more expensive - in some cases by as much as $ 20k - than their Japanese counterparts .
Who do they think they 're kidding ?
Does it really surprise anyone that GM is going bankrupt ?
It 's a FREEDOM thing , GM - you would n't understand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
I grew up buying Chevies.
So did my family.
GM cars had practically become a religious tradition in our family until a few years ago.
When On-Star appeared, my first thought was, "I'll only buy the lower end models without it".
Then GM made it standard.
I'm sorry, but I'm not going to BUY a car that helps big brother track my whereabouts and allows him to remotely disable my vehicle.
The fact that they would do something like this sends a very strong, very clear message the company is anti-American.
They just don't get this "freedom" thing the Bible-belt takes so seriously.
And as if to add insult to injury, they're cars are now more expensive - in some cases by as much as $20k - than their Japanese counterparts.
Who do they think they're kidding?
Does it really surprise anyone that GM is going bankrupt?
It's a FREEDOM thing, GM - you wouldn't understand.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865492</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866572</id>
	<title>Re:"I wonder if they'll test it on Pacemakers."</title>
	<author>shadowbearer</author>
	<datestamp>1264176780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
&nbsp; Testing it on pacemakers would be easy. Testing it on pacemakers installed into living humans would involve a high degree of liability.</p><p>
&nbsp; I can definitely see, in the not so far future, police being required to inspect vehicles for "illegal shielding modifications". Most officers I know would consider it gilding the lily, however, on top of all the other stuff they are asked to do but not even remotely trained for.</p><p>SB</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>  Testing it on pacemakers would be easy .
Testing it on pacemakers installed into living humans would involve a high degree of liability .
  I can definitely see , in the not so far future , police being required to inspect vehicles for " illegal shielding modifications " .
Most officers I know would consider it gilding the lily , however , on top of all the other stuff they are asked to do but not even remotely trained for.SB</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
  Testing it on pacemakers would be easy.
Testing it on pacemakers installed into living humans would involve a high degree of liability.
  I can definitely see, in the not so far future, police being required to inspect vehicles for "illegal shielding modifications".
Most officers I know would consider it gilding the lily, however, on top of all the other stuff they are asked to do but not even remotely trained for.SB</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865536</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866448</id>
	<title>Re:This isn't new a new idea at all.</title>
	<author>adaviel</author>
	<datestamp>1264175220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I remember seeing one of these things on a thing like an R/C model car on a wire, dropped down from under the police car to run forward under the suspect's car and zap it from underneath. Crazy.
I aso recall, I think, a HERF gun described by Winn Schwartau at DEFCON 7 that used explosives to move a conductor *really fast* through a magnetic field, generating a huge EMP.
I have my doubts about using anything like this in a city - too much chance of getting innocent bystanders, traffic light controllers etc.
Maybe they could mount one in a helicopter and zap someone fleeing on the highway.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember seeing one of these things on a thing like an R/C model car on a wire , dropped down from under the police car to run forward under the suspect 's car and zap it from underneath .
Crazy . I aso recall , I think , a HERF gun described by Winn Schwartau at DEFCON 7 that used explosives to move a conductor * really fast * through a magnetic field , generating a huge EMP .
I have my doubts about using anything like this in a city - too much chance of getting innocent bystanders , traffic light controllers etc .
Maybe they could mount one in a helicopter and zap someone fleeing on the highway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember seeing one of these things on a thing like an R/C model car on a wire, dropped down from under the police car to run forward under the suspect's car and zap it from underneath.
Crazy.
I aso recall, I think, a HERF gun described by Winn Schwartau at DEFCON 7 that used explosives to move a conductor *really fast* through a magnetic field, generating a huge EMP.
I have my doubts about using anything like this in a city - too much chance of getting innocent bystanders, traffic light controllers etc.
Maybe they could mount one in a helicopter and zap someone fleeing on the highway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867504</id>
	<title>What bullshit</title>
	<author>ZuchinniOne</author>
	<datestamp>1264188840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The argument that this is being designed for car chases is complete BS.  And while the technology is very cool, the potential for abuse is tremendous.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The argument that this is being designed for car chases is complete BS .
And while the technology is very cool , the potential for abuse is tremendous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The argument that this is being designed for car chases is complete BS.
And while the technology is very cool, the potential for abuse is tremendous.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866114</id>
	<title>Re:Microprocessor?</title>
	<author>girlintraining</author>
	<datestamp>1264171500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What if you drive a car without a microprocessor system?</p></div><p>You use diesel.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What if you drive a car without a microprocessor system ? You use diesel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What if you drive a car without a microprocessor system?You use diesel.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30886758</id>
	<title>Is this a weapon?</title>
	<author>bobdinsf</author>
	<datestamp>1264362300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've heard conspiracy theories that EMP can be used to bring down airplanes to assasinate the occupants.  Maybe I should have believed those theories.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've heard conspiracy theories that EMP can be used to bring down airplanes to assasinate the occupants .
Maybe I should have believed those theories .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've heard conspiracy theories that EMP can be used to bring down airplanes to assasinate the occupants.
Maybe I should have believed those theories.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866354</id>
	<title>Re:Pacemakers?</title>
	<author>cbiltcliffe</author>
	<datestamp>1264174140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They're not on the engine block.</p><p>Every relatively modern car I've ever seen has had the engine computer located under the dash.</p><p>The only exception to this that I've seen is my brother's 1977 Mercury Monarch, which has an electronic ignition module mounted on the inside of one fender.  The rest of the system, though, - fuel, timing, etc. - is all old school.  Carburetor, distributor, etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're not on the engine block.Every relatively modern car I 've ever seen has had the engine computer located under the dash.The only exception to this that I 've seen is my brother 's 1977 Mercury Monarch , which has an electronic ignition module mounted on the inside of one fender .
The rest of the system , though , - fuel , timing , etc .
- is all old school .
Carburetor , distributor , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're not on the engine block.Every relatively modern car I've ever seen has had the engine computer located under the dash.The only exception to this that I've seen is my brother's 1977 Mercury Monarch, which has an electronic ignition module mounted on the inside of one fender.
The rest of the system, though, - fuel, timing, etc.
- is all old school.
Carburetor, distributor, etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865592</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866952</id>
	<title>Re:Onstar?</title>
	<author>Idiomatick</author>
	<datestamp>1264181040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Onstar is hackable, and you can shut off cars untraceably from the comfort of your mom's basement.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Onstar is hackable , and you can shut off cars untraceably from the comfort of your mom 's basement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Onstar is hackable, and you can shut off cars untraceably from the comfort of your mom's basement.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866124</id>
	<title>EMP and atomic weapons.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264171560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>in July 1962 the Starfish Prime test damaged electronics in Honolulu  and New Zealand (approximately 1,300 kilometers away), fused 300 street lights on Oahu (Hawaii), set off about 100 burglar alarms, and caused the failure of a microwave  repeating station on Kauai, which cut off the sturdy telephone system from the other Hawaiian islands.</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-altitude\_nuclear\_explosion" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-altitude\_nuclear\_explosion</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></div></blockquote><p>The idea of MAD is silly these days with regards to loss of human life. However indirectly, millions would parish who rely so much on modern technology should an atomic weapon be detonated at high altitude. In such an event, you would see a flash in the sky and then suddenly the power going out. You look to your cell phone only to find it's turned off. Cars humming along the highway slowly coast to a stop - engines no longer idling. Kit airplanes having to make an emergency landing without power (hope it's not at night). Basically, if it's got a micro chip, the gates get fried. Your fucked. Start walking pal.</p><p>That is your EMP holocost. This new COP toy aint shit in comparison.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>in July 1962 the Starfish Prime test damaged electronics in Honolulu and New Zealand ( approximately 1,300 kilometers away ) , fused 300 street lights on Oahu ( Hawaii ) , set off about 100 burglar alarms , and caused the failure of a microwave repeating station on Kauai , which cut off the sturdy telephone system from the other Hawaiian islands.http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-altitude \ _nuclear \ _explosion [ wikipedia.org ] The idea of MAD is silly these days with regards to loss of human life .
However indirectly , millions would parish who rely so much on modern technology should an atomic weapon be detonated at high altitude .
In such an event , you would see a flash in the sky and then suddenly the power going out .
You look to your cell phone only to find it 's turned off .
Cars humming along the highway slowly coast to a stop - engines no longer idling .
Kit airplanes having to make an emergency landing without power ( hope it 's not at night ) .
Basically , if it 's got a micro chip , the gates get fried .
Your fucked .
Start walking pal.That is your EMP holocost .
This new COP toy aint shit in comparison .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>in July 1962 the Starfish Prime test damaged electronics in Honolulu  and New Zealand (approximately 1,300 kilometers away), fused 300 street lights on Oahu (Hawaii), set off about 100 burglar alarms, and caused the failure of a microwave  repeating station on Kauai, which cut off the sturdy telephone system from the other Hawaiian islands.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-altitude\_nuclear\_explosion [wikipedia.org]The idea of MAD is silly these days with regards to loss of human life.
However indirectly, millions would parish who rely so much on modern technology should an atomic weapon be detonated at high altitude.
In such an event, you would see a flash in the sky and then suddenly the power going out.
You look to your cell phone only to find it's turned off.
Cars humming along the highway slowly coast to a stop - engines no longer idling.
Kit airplanes having to make an emergency landing without power (hope it's not at night).
Basically, if it's got a micro chip, the gates get fried.
Your fucked.
Start walking pal.That is your EMP holocost.
This new COP toy aint shit in comparison.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865804</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865460</id>
	<title>I can't wait...</title>
	<author>roc97007</author>
	<datestamp>1264166460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...until the criminals get hold of this.  And they will.  It would be too useful not to.
</p><p>
I wonder if it works on helicopters also?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...until the criminals get hold of this .
And they will .
It would be too useful not to .
I wonder if it works on helicopters also ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...until the criminals get hold of this.
And they will.
It would be too useful not to.
I wonder if it works on helicopters also?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866350</id>
	<title>Re:OnStar not EMP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264174080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is interesting, and unfortunate; but it fits with other observations.<br> <br>

First, of course, is the fact that public understanding of technology and new developments is pretty weak. "DRM", is just <i>barely</i> creeping into popular consciousness, now that it is ubiquitous(every joe user has an ipod, uses DVDs, has an HDMI connection somewhere, or whatever). It isn't a huge surprise that public understanding of exactly what Onstar is capable of is pretty low. As far as I know, none of them are exactly secret(and, even if they were, doing a simple "worst case inference" from what is known would not be difficult. Cellular modem + connection to ECU = guilty of being a remote kill switch until conclusively proven innocent).<br> <br>

Second, and somewhat related, is the fact that very many people, even people who concern themselves with weapons and resisting the state and so forth, don't do much thinking about things that fall outside of the scope of traditional "weapons". For instance, back in the Clinton administration, when strong crypto was considered a munition, and "Clipper" was being actively advanced, the NRA (as best I've been able to determine from publicly available stuff) didn't so much as issue a press release about the matter. That is pretty myopic. Recognisably modern crypto/cryptoanalysis has been a weapon of war since WWII, and practically contemporary digital crypto was at least filtering out by the time Vietnam rolled around. The fact that encrypted communications were a valuable weapon should have been abundantly obvious to anybody by the 90's. And it isn't like Clinton and the NRA were best buddies in any case, and yet, when the Clinton administration rolled out Clipper, the crypto equivalent of a gun that refuses to fire if any state agent is within 50 yards, they didn't even put out a quick "We support the EFF on this one" note.<br> <br>

Third is the fact that potentially dangerous private-sector actions often get a pass, even if they clearly make the population more vulnerable to government power. If the feds came out and said "All vehicles from this day forth shall have remote kill switches and tracking devices, under penalty of law" a fair few people would flip their shit. Since, however, GM voluntarily installed them and there are (for the moment) cars that don't include them, any criticism will reliably be met with the slashdot-libertarian 101 "Well, you voluntarily purchased the vehicle, what could the problem possibly be?" no matter what attempts are made to make the "Yes, I realize that each individual transaction is theoretically voluntary. However, the percentage of vehicles that can be remotely tracked and shut down by the state has gone from 0 to X in just a few years, and that increase shows no sign of slowing. Doesn't that concern you?" argument.<br> <br>

Fourth is the fact that Onstar is one of those things that can easily fall into the unpleasant blind spot of both stereotypical liberals and stereotypical conservatives. Stereotypically, "liberals" tend to suspect and fear the potential malfeasance of government and its agents(concern about police brutality, war crimes, state torture, due process, etc.); but they also want certain services and protections from the state(public education, gun control, etc.). "Conservatives", on the other hand, tend to suspect and fear the state(small government, anti-gun control, anti tax, etc.); but they are often very supportive of and deferential toward agents and symbols of state power("law and order", support of police, support of armed forces, see "due process" as a technicality that lets scum go free, "constitution is not a suicide pact", etc.). For the stereotypical liberal, Onstar's remote kill easily slots into a safety narrative "Prevents dangerous police chases and tragic accidents. Perhaps, in the future, it can prevent speeding!". For the stereotypical conservative, it slots into the tough on crime narrative "Track and recover stolen property, allows police to capture thieves and carjackers."</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is interesting , and unfortunate ; but it fits with other observations .
First , of course , is the fact that public understanding of technology and new developments is pretty weak .
" DRM " , is just barely creeping into popular consciousness , now that it is ubiquitous ( every joe user has an ipod , uses DVDs , has an HDMI connection somewhere , or whatever ) .
It is n't a huge surprise that public understanding of exactly what Onstar is capable of is pretty low .
As far as I know , none of them are exactly secret ( and , even if they were , doing a simple " worst case inference " from what is known would not be difficult .
Cellular modem + connection to ECU = guilty of being a remote kill switch until conclusively proven innocent ) .
Second , and somewhat related , is the fact that very many people , even people who concern themselves with weapons and resisting the state and so forth , do n't do much thinking about things that fall outside of the scope of traditional " weapons " .
For instance , back in the Clinton administration , when strong crypto was considered a munition , and " Clipper " was being actively advanced , the NRA ( as best I 've been able to determine from publicly available stuff ) did n't so much as issue a press release about the matter .
That is pretty myopic .
Recognisably modern crypto/cryptoanalysis has been a weapon of war since WWII , and practically contemporary digital crypto was at least filtering out by the time Vietnam rolled around .
The fact that encrypted communications were a valuable weapon should have been abundantly obvious to anybody by the 90 's .
And it is n't like Clinton and the NRA were best buddies in any case , and yet , when the Clinton administration rolled out Clipper , the crypto equivalent of a gun that refuses to fire if any state agent is within 50 yards , they did n't even put out a quick " We support the EFF on this one " note .
Third is the fact that potentially dangerous private-sector actions often get a pass , even if they clearly make the population more vulnerable to government power .
If the feds came out and said " All vehicles from this day forth shall have remote kill switches and tracking devices , under penalty of law " a fair few people would flip their shit .
Since , however , GM voluntarily installed them and there are ( for the moment ) cars that do n't include them , any criticism will reliably be met with the slashdot-libertarian 101 " Well , you voluntarily purchased the vehicle , what could the problem possibly be ?
" no matter what attempts are made to make the " Yes , I realize that each individual transaction is theoretically voluntary .
However , the percentage of vehicles that can be remotely tracked and shut down by the state has gone from 0 to X in just a few years , and that increase shows no sign of slowing .
Does n't that concern you ?
" argument .
Fourth is the fact that Onstar is one of those things that can easily fall into the unpleasant blind spot of both stereotypical liberals and stereotypical conservatives .
Stereotypically , " liberals " tend to suspect and fear the potential malfeasance of government and its agents ( concern about police brutality , war crimes , state torture , due process , etc .
) ; but they also want certain services and protections from the state ( public education , gun control , etc. ) .
" Conservatives " , on the other hand , tend to suspect and fear the state ( small government , anti-gun control , anti tax , etc .
) ; but they are often very supportive of and deferential toward agents and symbols of state power ( " law and order " , support of police , support of armed forces , see " due process " as a technicality that lets scum go free , " constitution is not a suicide pact " , etc. ) .
For the stereotypical liberal , Onstar 's remote kill easily slots into a safety narrative " Prevents dangerous police chases and tragic accidents .
Perhaps , in the future , it can prevent speeding ! " .
For the stereotypical conservative , it slots into the tough on crime narrative " Track and recover stolen property , allows police to capture thieves and carjackers .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is interesting, and unfortunate; but it fits with other observations.
First, of course, is the fact that public understanding of technology and new developments is pretty weak.
"DRM", is just barely creeping into popular consciousness, now that it is ubiquitous(every joe user has an ipod, uses DVDs, has an HDMI connection somewhere, or whatever).
It isn't a huge surprise that public understanding of exactly what Onstar is capable of is pretty low.
As far as I know, none of them are exactly secret(and, even if they were, doing a simple "worst case inference" from what is known would not be difficult.
Cellular modem + connection to ECU = guilty of being a remote kill switch until conclusively proven innocent).
Second, and somewhat related, is the fact that very many people, even people who concern themselves with weapons and resisting the state and so forth, don't do much thinking about things that fall outside of the scope of traditional "weapons".
For instance, back in the Clinton administration, when strong crypto was considered a munition, and "Clipper" was being actively advanced, the NRA (as best I've been able to determine from publicly available stuff) didn't so much as issue a press release about the matter.
That is pretty myopic.
Recognisably modern crypto/cryptoanalysis has been a weapon of war since WWII, and practically contemporary digital crypto was at least filtering out by the time Vietnam rolled around.
The fact that encrypted communications were a valuable weapon should have been abundantly obvious to anybody by the 90's.
And it isn't like Clinton and the NRA were best buddies in any case, and yet, when the Clinton administration rolled out Clipper, the crypto equivalent of a gun that refuses to fire if any state agent is within 50 yards, they didn't even put out a quick "We support the EFF on this one" note.
Third is the fact that potentially dangerous private-sector actions often get a pass, even if they clearly make the population more vulnerable to government power.
If the feds came out and said "All vehicles from this day forth shall have remote kill switches and tracking devices, under penalty of law" a fair few people would flip their shit.
Since, however, GM voluntarily installed them and there are (for the moment) cars that don't include them, any criticism will reliably be met with the slashdot-libertarian 101 "Well, you voluntarily purchased the vehicle, what could the problem possibly be?
" no matter what attempts are made to make the "Yes, I realize that each individual transaction is theoretically voluntary.
However, the percentage of vehicles that can be remotely tracked and shut down by the state has gone from 0 to X in just a few years, and that increase shows no sign of slowing.
Doesn't that concern you?
" argument.
Fourth is the fact that Onstar is one of those things that can easily fall into the unpleasant blind spot of both stereotypical liberals and stereotypical conservatives.
Stereotypically, "liberals" tend to suspect and fear the potential malfeasance of government and its agents(concern about police brutality, war crimes, state torture, due process, etc.
); but they also want certain services and protections from the state(public education, gun control, etc.).
"Conservatives", on the other hand, tend to suspect and fear the state(small government, anti-gun control, anti tax, etc.
); but they are often very supportive of and deferential toward agents and symbols of state power("law and order", support of police, support of armed forces, see "due process" as a technicality that lets scum go free, "constitution is not a suicide pact", etc.).
For the stereotypical liberal, Onstar's remote kill easily slots into a safety narrative "Prevents dangerous police chases and tragic accidents.
Perhaps, in the future, it can prevent speeding!".
For the stereotypical conservative, it slots into the tough on crime narrative "Track and recover stolen property, allows police to capture thieves and carjackers.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865750</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865748</id>
	<title>Muscle car market boom</title>
	<author>davidwr</author>
	<datestamp>1264168500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Suddenly there's a big market for pre-electronic-ignition muscle cars.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Suddenly there 's a big market for pre-electronic-ignition muscle cars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Suddenly there's a big market for pre-electronic-ignition muscle cars.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867754</id>
	<title>Re:Uh-oh...</title>
	<author>Strange Ranger</author>
	<datestamp>1264278900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's great you know a few good cops.  The reason "all cops" suffer the bad rap is that even the ones who technically do a good honest job tend to act like asshole thugs toward civilians. As far as I can tell they've totally forgotten the "serve" part of "protect and serve".  And no I don't want them to serve me ice cream and rub my back.  But not acting like Nelson from the Simpsons would sure be a good start.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's great you know a few good cops .
The reason " all cops " suffer the bad rap is that even the ones who technically do a good honest job tend to act like asshole thugs toward civilians .
As far as I can tell they 've totally forgotten the " serve " part of " protect and serve " .
And no I do n't want them to serve me ice cream and rub my back .
But not acting like Nelson from the Simpsons would sure be a good start .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's great you know a few good cops.
The reason "all cops" suffer the bad rap is that even the ones who technically do a good honest job tend to act like asshole thugs toward civilians.
As far as I can tell they've totally forgotten the "serve" part of "protect and serve".
And no I don't want them to serve me ice cream and rub my back.
But not acting like Nelson from the Simpsons would sure be a good start.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865910</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865812</id>
	<title>Eureka</title>
	<author>Pretzalzz</author>
	<datestamp>1264168920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The bigger news is that the town of Eureka is real.  I always thought it was fictional.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The bigger news is that the town of Eureka is real .
I always thought it was fictional .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The bigger news is that the town of Eureka is real.
I always thought it was fictional.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866216</id>
	<title>Re:If it's safer than hot pursuit, go for it</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1264172580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Something being less wrong, does not make it right.</p><p>And I bet that soon, everybody BUT the police will have more of these handheld devices, and know better how to use them, than the cops.</p><p>Cue the unstoppable car that EMPs every cop, including the helicopters, large swat trucks, and even tanks! I wish there were a GTA IV mod to show this...</p><p>Also, I wonder how big the focus area is. If it&rsquo;s bigger than a car, then good luck avoiding a mass-crash on the highway. If it&rsquo;s smaller, then good luck hitting the right part at 100 mph!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Something being less wrong , does not make it right.And I bet that soon , everybody BUT the police will have more of these handheld devices , and know better how to use them , than the cops.Cue the unstoppable car that EMPs every cop , including the helicopters , large swat trucks , and even tanks !
I wish there were a GTA IV mod to show this...Also , I wonder how big the focus area is .
If it    s bigger than a car , then good luck avoiding a mass-crash on the highway .
If it    s smaller , then good luck hitting the right part at 100 mph !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Something being less wrong, does not make it right.And I bet that soon, everybody BUT the police will have more of these handheld devices, and know better how to use them, than the cops.Cue the unstoppable car that EMPs every cop, including the helicopters, large swat trucks, and even tanks!
I wish there were a GTA IV mod to show this...Also, I wonder how big the focus area is.
If it’s bigger than a car, then good luck avoiding a mass-crash on the highway.
If it’s smaller, then good luck hitting the right part at 100 mph!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866296</id>
	<title>Re:Nothing like a portable holocost.</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1264173240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>EMP is not directional? Yeah. Tell that to the inventor of the lens, the flashlight, and the parabolic mirror!<br>Because flashlights are just that: EMP guns in the visible light spectrum.</p><p>Electromagnetic waves are just electromagnetic waves. It does not matter if they are microwaves, visible light, or something else.<br>Of course you can focus, direct and channel them. Just like light.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>EMP is not directional ?
Yeah. Tell that to the inventor of the lens , the flashlight , and the parabolic mirror ! Because flashlights are just that : EMP guns in the visible light spectrum.Electromagnetic waves are just electromagnetic waves .
It does not matter if they are microwaves , visible light , or something else.Of course you can focus , direct and channel them .
Just like light .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>EMP is not directional?
Yeah. Tell that to the inventor of the lens, the flashlight, and the parabolic mirror!Because flashlights are just that: EMP guns in the visible light spectrum.Electromagnetic waves are just electromagnetic waves.
It does not matter if they are microwaves, visible light, or something else.Of course you can focus, direct and channel them.
Just like light.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865804</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30874870</id>
	<title>If this works, then Iran can shut us down</title>
	<author>mesocyclone</author>
	<datestamp>1264260960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If cars are this susceptible to microwave energy, then Iran will shortly have the ability to shut down much of our country, in an instant.</p><p>Exo-atmospheric nuclear EMP is easy to generate if you have a nuke (even a small one, although the area affected would be somewhat less) and can put it in a low orbit satellite. Iran has the latter (and is about to launch a couple more) and will soon have the former. Their nukes can be small (they have implosion technology).</p><p>They have also been testing an alternate delivery system - a SCUD launch with the warhead detected at the top of the trajectory - EMP is the only explanation for such tests.</p><p>So, if they are nutty enough (and do you want to bet your survival on the sanity of President ImANutJob?), they can kill tens of millions of Americans, with no warning at all. They can orbit a nuke in a satellite, to be detonated on command. Or, they could launch a few SCUDs from merchant ships hundreds of miles off our shores.</p><p>Imagine a US where a large area (say, 1000mi in diameter) suddenly has a destroyed electrical transmissions system,almost all telecoms down, and almost all vehicles unusable. It's not a pretty thought.</p><p>See US Gov report at <a href="http://www.empcommission.org/docs/A2473-EMP\_Commission-7MB.pdf" title="empcommission.org">http://www.empcommission.org/docs/A2473-EMP\_Commission-7MB.pdf</a> [empcommission.org] (pdf)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If cars are this susceptible to microwave energy , then Iran will shortly have the ability to shut down much of our country , in an instant.Exo-atmospheric nuclear EMP is easy to generate if you have a nuke ( even a small one , although the area affected would be somewhat less ) and can put it in a low orbit satellite .
Iran has the latter ( and is about to launch a couple more ) and will soon have the former .
Their nukes can be small ( they have implosion technology ) .They have also been testing an alternate delivery system - a SCUD launch with the warhead detected at the top of the trajectory - EMP is the only explanation for such tests.So , if they are nutty enough ( and do you want to bet your survival on the sanity of President ImANutJob ?
) , they can kill tens of millions of Americans , with no warning at all .
They can orbit a nuke in a satellite , to be detonated on command .
Or , they could launch a few SCUDs from merchant ships hundreds of miles off our shores.Imagine a US where a large area ( say , 1000mi in diameter ) suddenly has a destroyed electrical transmissions system,almost all telecoms down , and almost all vehicles unusable .
It 's not a pretty thought.See US Gov report at http : //www.empcommission.org/docs/A2473-EMP \ _Commission-7MB.pdf [ empcommission.org ] ( pdf )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If cars are this susceptible to microwave energy, then Iran will shortly have the ability to shut down much of our country, in an instant.Exo-atmospheric nuclear EMP is easy to generate if you have a nuke (even a small one, although the area affected would be somewhat less) and can put it in a low orbit satellite.
Iran has the latter (and is about to launch a couple more) and will soon have the former.
Their nukes can be small (they have implosion technology).They have also been testing an alternate delivery system - a SCUD launch with the warhead detected at the top of the trajectory - EMP is the only explanation for such tests.So, if they are nutty enough (and do you want to bet your survival on the sanity of President ImANutJob?
), they can kill tens of millions of Americans, with no warning at all.
They can orbit a nuke in a satellite, to be detonated on command.
Or, they could launch a few SCUDs from merchant ships hundreds of miles off our shores.Imagine a US where a large area (say, 1000mi in diameter) suddenly has a destroyed electrical transmissions system,almost all telecoms down, and almost all vehicles unusable.
It's not a pretty thought.See US Gov report at http://www.empcommission.org/docs/A2473-EMP\_Commission-7MB.pdf [empcommission.org] (pdf)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865498</id>
	<title>Interesting choice of wording</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264166760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They say that they can disable the car's electronic systems - but what they really mean is DESTROY those systems. Any vehicle targeted by this technology will require thousands of dollars in repairs before it can be driven again.<p>
That might prevent the technology from widespread use - it would be a field day for attorneys as police destroyed people's cars (and other property) while they were chasing a criminal. I'm sure that the vendor also says they can target one car specifically while they disable it - but it's not going to work that way in the real world. Their EMP pulse will spread as a spherical field and any electronics within range will get fried.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They say that they can disable the car 's electronic systems - but what they really mean is DESTROY those systems .
Any vehicle targeted by this technology will require thousands of dollars in repairs before it can be driven again .
That might prevent the technology from widespread use - it would be a field day for attorneys as police destroyed people 's cars ( and other property ) while they were chasing a criminal .
I 'm sure that the vendor also says they can target one car specifically while they disable it - but it 's not going to work that way in the real world .
Their EMP pulse will spread as a spherical field and any electronics within range will get fried .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They say that they can disable the car's electronic systems - but what they really mean is DESTROY those systems.
Any vehicle targeted by this technology will require thousands of dollars in repairs before it can be driven again.
That might prevent the technology from widespread use - it would be a field day for attorneys as police destroyed people's cars (and other property) while they were chasing a criminal.
I'm sure that the vendor also says they can target one car specifically while they disable it - but it's not going to work that way in the real world.
Their EMP pulse will spread as a spherical field and any electronics within range will get fried.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867352</id>
	<title>Re:Before deployment</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264186560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The demographics prone to high speed chases are not those prone to having pacemakers.  Provided that the EMP is sufficiently directed (and scaling it down is done most easily by better focus anyway) this should be a moot issue.  Other electronics (laptops/PDAs/Cellphones) that would make good evidence are another matter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The demographics prone to high speed chases are not those prone to having pacemakers .
Provided that the EMP is sufficiently directed ( and scaling it down is done most easily by better focus anyway ) this should be a moot issue .
Other electronics ( laptops/PDAs/Cellphones ) that would make good evidence are another matter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The demographics prone to high speed chases are not those prone to having pacemakers.
Provided that the EMP is sufficiently directed (and scaling it down is done most easily by better focus anyway) this should be a moot issue.
Other electronics (laptops/PDAs/Cellphones) that would make good evidence are another matter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866962</id>
	<title>Re:This is an anti-robot weapon, not anti-car</title>
	<author>greyhueofdoubt</author>
	<datestamp>1264181220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt;The car might as well be sent to the crusher after being hit with this device</p><p>Have you ever actually seen what happens to most cars at the end of a high-speed chase? They're not exactly ready for the sales lot.</p><p>Why do you all think that this will be used for routine traffic stops?</p><p>"Hey, that guy's got expired tags. Zap him and brick his $40k suv. Don't worry about the consequences, because we are teh police and it's totally fair to compare us to the SS and the gov't of the book 1984 which someone read 15 years ago and we never get punished and it's completely appropriate for the country to judge the entire force based on the actions of a few screw-ups even though we're the first people they call when their neighbor won't turn down the music. Also: run-on sentences."</p><p>-b</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; The car might as well be sent to the crusher after being hit with this deviceHave you ever actually seen what happens to most cars at the end of a high-speed chase ?
They 're not exactly ready for the sales lot.Why do you all think that this will be used for routine traffic stops ?
" Hey , that guy 's got expired tags .
Zap him and brick his $ 40k suv .
Do n't worry about the consequences , because we are teh police and it 's totally fair to compare us to the SS and the gov't of the book 1984 which someone read 15 years ago and we never get punished and it 's completely appropriate for the country to judge the entire force based on the actions of a few screw-ups even though we 're the first people they call when their neighbor wo n't turn down the music .
Also : run-on sentences .
" -b</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt;The car might as well be sent to the crusher after being hit with this deviceHave you ever actually seen what happens to most cars at the end of a high-speed chase?
They're not exactly ready for the sales lot.Why do you all think that this will be used for routine traffic stops?
"Hey, that guy's got expired tags.
Zap him and brick his $40k suv.
Don't worry about the consequences, because we are teh police and it's totally fair to compare us to the SS and the gov't of the book 1984 which someone read 15 years ago and we never get punished and it's completely appropriate for the country to judge the entire force based on the actions of a few screw-ups even though we're the first people they call when their neighbor won't turn down the music.
Also: run-on sentences.
"-b</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865856</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866144</id>
	<title>Re:This is an anti-robot weapon, not anti-car</title>
	<author>indiechild</author>
	<datestamp>1264171680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Huh, why would an ATM spit out money when it goes dead? Sounds too much like Hollywood.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Huh , why would an ATM spit out money when it goes dead ?
Sounds too much like Hollywood .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Huh, why would an ATM spit out money when it goes dead?
Sounds too much like Hollywood.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865548</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865822</id>
	<title>Oudin coil</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264168980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oudin\_coil" title="wikipedia.org">build one of these</a> [wikipedia.org]
</p><p>
Use a mile of copper wire for the inside windings, and several turns of flexible copper pipe for the outer ones. Not directional, but it WILL disable a lot of the nearby electronics while in operation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>build one of these [ wikipedia.org ] Use a mile of copper wire for the inside windings , and several turns of flexible copper pipe for the outer ones .
Not directional , but it WILL disable a lot of the nearby electronics while in operation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
build one of these [wikipedia.org]

Use a mile of copper wire for the inside windings, and several turns of flexible copper pipe for the outer ones.
Not directional, but it WILL disable a lot of the nearby electronics while in operation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865746</id>
	<title>Movie Plot Threat</title>
	<author>BoydWaters</author>
	<datestamp>1264168500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Terrorists stage a high-profile robbery to incite a police chase, which leads to the use of one of these EMP things, aimed at Mae West. Th' InterTubes go dark, civilization collapses.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Terrorists stage a high-profile robbery to incite a police chase , which leads to the use of one of these EMP things , aimed at Mae West .
Th ' InterTubes go dark , civilization collapses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Terrorists stage a high-profile robbery to incite a police chase, which leads to the use of one of these EMP things, aimed at Mae West.
Th' InterTubes go dark, civilization collapses.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865912</id>
	<title>Re:Uh-oh...</title>
	<author>Nemyst</author>
	<datestamp>1264169640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's way worse than the taser. The proper equivalent would be for the cops to have a "directed" gas weapon that'd knock down everyone in the area of effect, causing injuries when they fall. Tasers are problematic, but this would be beyond ridiculous. They could kill dozens of cars in a chase! Just imagine if the weapon is fired near a critical location like an hospital or a power plant...</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's way worse than the taser .
The proper equivalent would be for the cops to have a " directed " gas weapon that 'd knock down everyone in the area of effect , causing injuries when they fall .
Tasers are problematic , but this would be beyond ridiculous .
They could kill dozens of cars in a chase !
Just imagine if the weapon is fired near a critical location like an hospital or a power plant.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's way worse than the taser.
The proper equivalent would be for the cops to have a "directed" gas weapon that'd knock down everyone in the area of effect, causing injuries when they fall.
Tasers are problematic, but this would be beyond ridiculous.
They could kill dozens of cars in a chase!
Just imagine if the weapon is fired near a critical location like an hospital or a power plant...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30881086</id>
	<title>Re:Before deployment</title>
	<author>pimproot</author>
	<datestamp>1264364940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some geriatric cottonhead with a pacemaker in a high speed chase with police... sounds like some good slapstick comedy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some geriatric cottonhead with a pacemaker in a high speed chase with police... sounds like some good slapstick comedy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some geriatric cottonhead with a pacemaker in a high speed chase with police... sounds like some good slapstick comedy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30869568</id>
	<title>BS</title>
	<author>PJ6</author>
	<datestamp>1264261380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know of only one practical device that disabled a car in this manner, developed more than 10 years ago - it was a little sled with a wire that fired forward from underneath a cruiser to slide under a fleeing vehicle. The designers of the device specifically noted that this was the only way you could disable a car with EMP, because it is extremely difficult to get a pulse to punch through the car's metal to the bits that matter.</p><p>So who is this guy who's apparently made a major technological breakthrough? Some Joe Blow in a garage who apparently claims that in 5 years we will have hand-held EMP rifles. Reporters don't know crap about engineering - I call bullshit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know of only one practical device that disabled a car in this manner , developed more than 10 years ago - it was a little sled with a wire that fired forward from underneath a cruiser to slide under a fleeing vehicle .
The designers of the device specifically noted that this was the only way you could disable a car with EMP , because it is extremely difficult to get a pulse to punch through the car 's metal to the bits that matter.So who is this guy who 's apparently made a major technological breakthrough ?
Some Joe Blow in a garage who apparently claims that in 5 years we will have hand-held EMP rifles .
Reporters do n't know crap about engineering - I call bullshit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know of only one practical device that disabled a car in this manner, developed more than 10 years ago - it was a little sled with a wire that fired forward from underneath a cruiser to slide under a fleeing vehicle.
The designers of the device specifically noted that this was the only way you could disable a car with EMP, because it is extremely difficult to get a pulse to punch through the car's metal to the bits that matter.So who is this guy who's apparently made a major technological breakthrough?
Some Joe Blow in a garage who apparently claims that in 5 years we will have hand-held EMP rifles.
Reporters don't know crap about engineering - I call bullshit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866018</id>
	<title>This isn't new a new idea at all.</title>
	<author>NimbleSquirrel</author>
	<datestamp>1264170660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Eureka Aerospace can call it "HPEMS", but really it is just another HERF device, and it is certainly not a new thing. In fact you can buy kits from <a href="http://amazing1.com/" title="amazing1.com">places like this</a> [amazing1.com] and build your own.
<br> <br>
This is a High Energy Radio Frequency (HERF) gun not an EMP weapon, although the two are very similar in their final effects. EMP devices are omnidirectional and create a blanket pulse across a far larger portion of the EM spectrum. HERF affects a much smaller part of the spectrum, which allows the generating electronics to be tuned for higher efficiency and allowing the antennas to be directional. EMP devices are usually much higher power that fry the electronics, whereas HERF devices typically only cause disruption (requiring pulses to be sustained to prevent the normal function from restarting).
<br> <br>
It will shut down the engine computers of most modern cars, but cars with carburetors and mechanical based ignition systems (ie. distributors) and diesel engines without electronic injection will be unnafected. While this may affect most cars and trucks made since 1970, it does not include them all.
<br> <br>
To get to the power output that will stop a vehicle from distances usually seen in car chases would require a massive arrangement, capacitor bank, and a dedicated power supply to keep the HERF pulses sustained. This certainly will not be the kind of device that will be mounted on police cars any time soon.
<br> <br>
I have to also wonder how effective it would be in an actual car chase (assuming they could find as way of making it mobile). They would typically be shooting it at the rear of the car where the bodywork would act as shielding for the engine computer, and there is nothing to stop portions of the RF pulses reflecting off the metal bodywork and disabling chasing police cars.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Eureka Aerospace can call it " HPEMS " , but really it is just another HERF device , and it is certainly not a new thing .
In fact you can buy kits from places like this [ amazing1.com ] and build your own .
This is a High Energy Radio Frequency ( HERF ) gun not an EMP weapon , although the two are very similar in their final effects .
EMP devices are omnidirectional and create a blanket pulse across a far larger portion of the EM spectrum .
HERF affects a much smaller part of the spectrum , which allows the generating electronics to be tuned for higher efficiency and allowing the antennas to be directional .
EMP devices are usually much higher power that fry the electronics , whereas HERF devices typically only cause disruption ( requiring pulses to be sustained to prevent the normal function from restarting ) .
It will shut down the engine computers of most modern cars , but cars with carburetors and mechanical based ignition systems ( ie .
distributors ) and diesel engines without electronic injection will be unnafected .
While this may affect most cars and trucks made since 1970 , it does not include them all .
To get to the power output that will stop a vehicle from distances usually seen in car chases would require a massive arrangement , capacitor bank , and a dedicated power supply to keep the HERF pulses sustained .
This certainly will not be the kind of device that will be mounted on police cars any time soon .
I have to also wonder how effective it would be in an actual car chase ( assuming they could find as way of making it mobile ) .
They would typically be shooting it at the rear of the car where the bodywork would act as shielding for the engine computer , and there is nothing to stop portions of the RF pulses reflecting off the metal bodywork and disabling chasing police cars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Eureka Aerospace can call it "HPEMS", but really it is just another HERF device, and it is certainly not a new thing.
In fact you can buy kits from places like this [amazing1.com] and build your own.
This is a High Energy Radio Frequency (HERF) gun not an EMP weapon, although the two are very similar in their final effects.
EMP devices are omnidirectional and create a blanket pulse across a far larger portion of the EM spectrum.
HERF affects a much smaller part of the spectrum, which allows the generating electronics to be tuned for higher efficiency and allowing the antennas to be directional.
EMP devices are usually much higher power that fry the electronics, whereas HERF devices typically only cause disruption (requiring pulses to be sustained to prevent the normal function from restarting).
It will shut down the engine computers of most modern cars, but cars with carburetors and mechanical based ignition systems (ie.
distributors) and diesel engines without electronic injection will be unnafected.
While this may affect most cars and trucks made since 1970, it does not include them all.
To get to the power output that will stop a vehicle from distances usually seen in car chases would require a massive arrangement, capacitor bank, and a dedicated power supply to keep the HERF pulses sustained.
This certainly will not be the kind of device that will be mounted on police cars any time soon.
I have to also wonder how effective it would be in an actual car chase (assuming they could find as way of making it mobile).
They would typically be shooting it at the rear of the car where the bodywork would act as shielding for the engine computer, and there is nothing to stop portions of the RF pulses reflecting off the metal bodywork and disabling chasing police cars.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865910</id>
	<title>Re:Uh-oh...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264169640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is the problem the Taser, or the fact that it's considered "safe" then?  I'd certainly rather be tasered than shot.  And I'm glad cops user tasers instead of shooting.  And I'm not sure it's "at the drop of a hat."</p><p>And frankly, I get tired of the anti-cop sentiment.  Sure, we hear all the bad stories and there have been abuses and they should be dealt with.  To me, those stories are roughly equivalent to, oh, senators abusing their power/position.  To reflect the actions of the ones that abuse it on <i>all</i> cops is, IMO, very childish.</p><p>I know actually quite a few cops, they are very good people.  One in particular, I know, risks his life very frequently during night raids and the like.  Another one I know was in a very extended undercover thing... complete with growing a beard, changing his name, and everything.  I hate it when they, who are "cops" and who actually write *gasp* speeding tickets for people who *gasp* were breaking the speed limit, get a bad rap because of the ACTUALLY bad people that end up being cops and abuse their power.  I think abusing that power is sick and it should be treated very justly... which it doesn't appear it generally is.  On the other hand, cop-killings don't seem to be treated very justly, either.  Or most violent crimes, IMO.  "Temporary insanity" and all that.</p><p>It's "excessive" force not "deadly" force.  Deadly force is fine, when not excessive.</p><p>Sorry for the irritable tone.  I'm a nice guy, really.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:) hehe.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is the problem the Taser , or the fact that it 's considered " safe " then ?
I 'd certainly rather be tasered than shot .
And I 'm glad cops user tasers instead of shooting .
And I 'm not sure it 's " at the drop of a hat .
" And frankly , I get tired of the anti-cop sentiment .
Sure , we hear all the bad stories and there have been abuses and they should be dealt with .
To me , those stories are roughly equivalent to , oh , senators abusing their power/position .
To reflect the actions of the ones that abuse it on all cops is , IMO , very childish.I know actually quite a few cops , they are very good people .
One in particular , I know , risks his life very frequently during night raids and the like .
Another one I know was in a very extended undercover thing... complete with growing a beard , changing his name , and everything .
I hate it when they , who are " cops " and who actually write * gasp * speeding tickets for people who * gasp * were breaking the speed limit , get a bad rap because of the ACTUALLY bad people that end up being cops and abuse their power .
I think abusing that power is sick and it should be treated very justly... which it does n't appear it generally is .
On the other hand , cop-killings do n't seem to be treated very justly , either .
Or most violent crimes , IMO .
" Temporary insanity " and all that.It 's " excessive " force not " deadly " force .
Deadly force is fine , when not excessive.Sorry for the irritable tone .
I 'm a nice guy , really .
: ) hehe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is the problem the Taser, or the fact that it's considered "safe" then?
I'd certainly rather be tasered than shot.
And I'm glad cops user tasers instead of shooting.
And I'm not sure it's "at the drop of a hat.
"And frankly, I get tired of the anti-cop sentiment.
Sure, we hear all the bad stories and there have been abuses and they should be dealt with.
To me, those stories are roughly equivalent to, oh, senators abusing their power/position.
To reflect the actions of the ones that abuse it on all cops is, IMO, very childish.I know actually quite a few cops, they are very good people.
One in particular, I know, risks his life very frequently during night raids and the like.
Another one I know was in a very extended undercover thing... complete with growing a beard, changing his name, and everything.
I hate it when they, who are "cops" and who actually write *gasp* speeding tickets for people who *gasp* were breaking the speed limit, get a bad rap because of the ACTUALLY bad people that end up being cops and abuse their power.
I think abusing that power is sick and it should be treated very justly... which it doesn't appear it generally is.
On the other hand, cop-killings don't seem to be treated very justly, either.
Or most violent crimes, IMO.
"Temporary insanity" and all that.It's "excessive" force not "deadly" force.
Deadly force is fine, when not excessive.Sorry for the irritable tone.
I'm a nice guy, really.
:) hehe.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867024</id>
	<title>Because the engine is the only thing with a chip</title>
	<author>nick\_davison</author>
	<datestamp>1264181700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The good news is the EMP will magically avoid trashing people's smart phones. It'll leave the computers, digital cameras, etc. in perfect working order. Best of all, it absolutely will not kill the person with a pacemaker.</p><p>And they will never, ever, miss, doing all that damage to another motorist, knocking out the street lights the car was passing through and causing other accidents or hitting a building and fragging the poor bystanding company's network.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The good news is the EMP will magically avoid trashing people 's smart phones .
It 'll leave the computers , digital cameras , etc .
in perfect working order .
Best of all , it absolutely will not kill the person with a pacemaker.And they will never , ever , miss , doing all that damage to another motorist , knocking out the street lights the car was passing through and causing other accidents or hitting a building and fragging the poor bystanding company 's network .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The good news is the EMP will magically avoid trashing people's smart phones.
It'll leave the computers, digital cameras, etc.
in perfect working order.
Best of all, it absolutely will not kill the person with a pacemaker.And they will never, ever, miss, doing all that damage to another motorist, knocking out the street lights the car was passing through and causing other accidents or hitting a building and fragging the poor bystanding company's network.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865672</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting choice of wording</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264167840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>- it would be a field day for attorneys as police destroyed people's cars (and other property) while they were chasing a criminal.</p></div><p>The standard answer used by many municipalities (and accepted by many courts) is that they are not liable. There won't be a field day -- it'll be something covered by insurance, and sucks to be you if you don't have any.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>- it would be a field day for attorneys as police destroyed people 's cars ( and other property ) while they were chasing a criminal.The standard answer used by many municipalities ( and accepted by many courts ) is that they are not liable .
There wo n't be a field day -- it 'll be something covered by insurance , and sucks to be you if you do n't have any .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>- it would be a field day for attorneys as police destroyed people's cars (and other property) while they were chasing a criminal.The standard answer used by many municipalities (and accepted by many courts) is that they are not liable.
There won't be a field day -- it'll be something covered by insurance, and sucks to be you if you don't have any.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865498</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866742</id>
	<title>Re:Nothing like a portable holocost.</title>
	<author>pnewhook</author>
	<datestamp>1264178880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Read the article - its not an EMP.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Read the article - its not an EMP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Read the article - its not an EMP.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865804</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866220</id>
	<title>Re:OnStar not EMP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264172640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Someone who doesn't know what they are talking about. OnStar works through the cellular system.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Someone who does n't know what they are talking about .
OnStar works through the cellular system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Someone who doesn't know what they are talking about.
OnStar works through the cellular system.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865492</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867472</id>
	<title>Hell, this isn't even new to /.</title>
	<author>dlenmn</author>
	<datestamp>1264188360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <a href="http://slashdot.org/articles/99/09/10/0826258.shtml" title="slashdot.org">1999</a> [slashdot.org] and <a href="http://science.slashdot.org/story/03/05/07/1559238/Build-Your-Own-HERF-Gun" title="slashdot.org">more</a> [slashdot.org] <a href="http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/09/27/2020204" title="slashdot.org">recently</a> [slashdot.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1999 [ slashdot.org ] and more [ slashdot.org ] recently [ slashdot.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> 1999 [slashdot.org] and more [slashdot.org] recently [slashdot.org].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866162</id>
	<title>Re:This is an anti-robot weapon, not anti-car</title>
	<author>Jeremi</author>
	<datestamp>1264171920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Nevermind the fact that this has "massive liability" (i.e. instant class action lawsuits) written all over it;</i></p><p>Is it really any worse, liability-wise, than the high-speed chase that would be the alternative?  What's the liability when one or more cars involved in the chase lose control and wipe out an entire Starbucks?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nevermind the fact that this has " massive liability " ( i.e .
instant class action lawsuits ) written all over it ; Is it really any worse , liability-wise , than the high-speed chase that would be the alternative ?
What 's the liability when one or more cars involved in the chase lose control and wipe out an entire Starbucks ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nevermind the fact that this has "massive liability" (i.e.
instant class action lawsuits) written all over it;Is it really any worse, liability-wise, than the high-speed chase that would be the alternative?
What's the liability when one or more cars involved in the chase lose control and wipe out an entire Starbucks?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865856</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866106</id>
	<title>Re:Before deployment</title>
	<author>aaandre</author>
	<datestamp>1264171440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But then, maybe tasers can be used for revival? Letting the cops combine business with pleasure, at last!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But then , maybe tasers can be used for revival ?
Letting the cops combine business with pleasure , at last !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But then, maybe tasers can be used for revival?
Letting the cops combine business with pleasure, at last!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865442</id>
	<title>help in police chases?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264166280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You bet - I'll be able to disable cop cars chasing me.</p><p>I mean, \_criminals\_ will. Ahem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You bet - I 'll be able to disable cop cars chasing me.I mean , \ _criminals \ _ will .
Ahem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You bet - I'll be able to disable cop cars chasing me.I mean, \_criminals\_ will.
Ahem.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865466</id>
	<title>Onstar?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264166460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>How the heck is this similar to the Onstar system? This uses a directed EMP to disrupt electronic engine control, Onstar uses a built-in remote kill switch.  That's like saying shooting a lightbulb is the same as turning off the switch.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How the heck is this similar to the Onstar system ?
This uses a directed EMP to disrupt electronic engine control , Onstar uses a built-in remote kill switch .
That 's like saying shooting a lightbulb is the same as turning off the switch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How the heck is this similar to the Onstar system?
This uses a directed EMP to disrupt electronic engine control, Onstar uses a built-in remote kill switch.
That's like saying shooting a lightbulb is the same as turning off the switch.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30874104</id>
	<title>Re:"I wonder if they'll test it on Pacemakers."</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264253820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hmmmm.</p><p>How about shielding your engine with ferrofluid in a flexible plastic container?</p><p>Imagine the excitement when the ferrofluid reacts to that emp blast!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmmmm.How about shielding your engine with ferrofluid in a flexible plastic container ? Imagine the excitement when the ferrofluid reacts to that emp blast !
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmmmm.How about shielding your engine with ferrofluid in a flexible plastic container?Imagine the excitement when the ferrofluid reacts to that emp blast!
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865536</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865850</id>
	<title>HOLY CRAP!</title>
	<author>jeko</author>
	<datestamp>1264169160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>You mean I don't have to spend 100 bucks on bulbs, ammo and spackle every month?!</htmltext>
<tokenext>You mean I do n't have to spend 100 bucks on bulbs , ammo and spackle every month ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You mean I don't have to spend 100 bucks on bulbs, ammo and spackle every month?
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30872774</id>
	<title>Carburetor for the win</title>
	<author>Baloo Uriza</author>
	<datestamp>1264243200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Carburetors:  Not just for bongs anymore.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Carburetors : Not just for bongs anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Carburetors:  Not just for bongs anymore.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865530</id>
	<title>In an attempt to...</title>
	<author>tocs</author>
	<datestamp>1264166940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"In an attempt to put an end to dangerous police high speed chases," might also read:

In an attempt to make lots of money...</htmltext>
<tokenext>" In an attempt to put an end to dangerous police high speed chases , " might also read : In an attempt to make lots of money.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"In an attempt to put an end to dangerous police high speed chases," might also read:

In an attempt to make lots of money...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865966</id>
	<title>EMP!</title>
	<author>424f54</author>
	<datestamp>1264170120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't worry about this. The cops can only get it after a 15 killstreak which is pretty hard to get for noobs..... or a random care package (oh no).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't worry about this .
The cops can only get it after a 15 killstreak which is pretty hard to get for noobs..... or a random care package ( oh no ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't worry about this.
The cops can only get it after a 15 killstreak which is pretty hard to get for noobs..... or a random care package (oh no).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865784</id>
	<title>More importantly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264168680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Will it work on my neighbor's stereo?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Will it work on my neighbor 's stereo ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Will it work on my neighbor's stereo?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865554</id>
	<title>Re:I can't wait...</title>
	<author>nacturation</author>
	<datestamp>1264167000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The criminals have had almost seven years to try: <a href="http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/05/07/1559238" title="slashdot.org">http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/05/07/1559238</a> [slashdot.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The criminals have had almost seven years to try : http : //science.slashdot.org/article.pl ? sid = 03/05/07/1559238 [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The criminals have had almost seven years to try: http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/05/07/1559238 [slashdot.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865460</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866784</id>
	<title>Not many cops want them</title>
	<author>Myrcutio</author>
	<datestamp>1264179300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>See, thing about tasers, in order to be issued one you have to agree to be tazed.  Most cops are pretty much fine just shooting a fleeing suspect in the leg rather than be tazed once a year.  As they say, you don't give em a gun so they can chase ya.</htmltext>
<tokenext>See , thing about tasers , in order to be issued one you have to agree to be tazed .
Most cops are pretty much fine just shooting a fleeing suspect in the leg rather than be tazed once a year .
As they say , you do n't give em a gun so they can chase ya .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>See, thing about tasers, in order to be issued one you have to agree to be tazed.
Most cops are pretty much fine just shooting a fleeing suspect in the leg rather than be tazed once a year.
As they say, you don't give em a gun so they can chase ya.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867526</id>
	<title>Re:Uh-oh...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264189320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sure you would rather be shot in the leg, than tazered if, for example, you have a heart condition, which a cop would have no way of telling. Also, being shot in the leg, vs being tazered (even in a perfectly healthy person) for too long... come on.</p><p>You don't have to shoot someone to kill, you know. Police aren't just tazering criminals. They're zapping people before even asking questions or being given a reason to sometimes. It's like that guy that was going into an epileptic seizure on a 911 ambulence call and a cop tazered him, leaving permanant damage to the guy. I would rather police just had guns, and used them wisely. Wrongful shootings happened, but to be honest, we shouldn't be hiring jumped up lunatics with a mean streak to be Peace Officers in the first place.</p><p>They should be guardians of the public, not attack dogs looking for someone to assault.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure you would rather be shot in the leg , than tazered if , for example , you have a heart condition , which a cop would have no way of telling .
Also , being shot in the leg , vs being tazered ( even in a perfectly healthy person ) for too long... come on.You do n't have to shoot someone to kill , you know .
Police are n't just tazering criminals .
They 're zapping people before even asking questions or being given a reason to sometimes .
It 's like that guy that was going into an epileptic seizure on a 911 ambulence call and a cop tazered him , leaving permanant damage to the guy .
I would rather police just had guns , and used them wisely .
Wrongful shootings happened , but to be honest , we should n't be hiring jumped up lunatics with a mean streak to be Peace Officers in the first place.They should be guardians of the public , not attack dogs looking for someone to assault .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure you would rather be shot in the leg, than tazered if, for example, you have a heart condition, which a cop would have no way of telling.
Also, being shot in the leg, vs being tazered (even in a perfectly healthy person) for too long... come on.You don't have to shoot someone to kill, you know.
Police aren't just tazering criminals.
They're zapping people before even asking questions or being given a reason to sometimes.
It's like that guy that was going into an epileptic seizure on a 911 ambulence call and a cop tazered him, leaving permanant damage to the guy.
I would rather police just had guns, and used them wisely.
Wrongful shootings happened, but to be honest, we shouldn't be hiring jumped up lunatics with a mean streak to be Peace Officers in the first place.They should be guardians of the public, not attack dogs looking for someone to assault.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865910</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866536</id>
	<title>They did not really think this out.</title>
	<author>Criton</author>
	<datestamp>1264176300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Another issue is friendly fire you're going to be more likely to fire your fellow police car then the suspect's car.
The HRF pulse also could accidentally or purposely reflected back at the source and damage radios,camera's and cell phones these are a lot less robust then an engine control computer.
Last it's not exactly hard to defend against a little copper mesh and foil here and there and you can make a car almost invernable to anything less then a nuclear EMP.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Another issue is friendly fire you 're going to be more likely to fire your fellow police car then the suspect 's car .
The HRF pulse also could accidentally or purposely reflected back at the source and damage radios,camera 's and cell phones these are a lot less robust then an engine control computer .
Last it 's not exactly hard to defend against a little copper mesh and foil here and there and you can make a car almost invernable to anything less then a nuclear EMP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another issue is friendly fire you're going to be more likely to fire your fellow police car then the suspect's car.
The HRF pulse also could accidentally or purposely reflected back at the source and damage radios,camera's and cell phones these are a lot less robust then an engine control computer.
Last it's not exactly hard to defend against a little copper mesh and foil here and there and you can make a car almost invernable to anything less then a nuclear EMP.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30872794</id>
	<title>Re:They can't kill momentum.</title>
	<author>Geminii</author>
	<datestamp>1264243380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Do not fret, citizen! Such things are a worry of the past, with the new fully electronic braking systems!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do not fret , citizen !
Such things are a worry of the past , with the new fully electronic braking systems !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do not fret, citizen!
Such things are a worry of the past, with the new fully electronic braking systems!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867420</id>
	<title>Re:Uh-oh...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264187400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Realistically, tasers are roughly equivalent to billy club/kinghtsticks with (depending on model) a longer reach.  I imagine that getting tased probably hurts more at initially, but on average has shorter lasting effects.  As with the billy club, it can be abused (the Rodney King incident for instance).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Realistically , tasers are roughly equivalent to billy club/kinghtsticks with ( depending on model ) a longer reach .
I imagine that getting tased probably hurts more at initially , but on average has shorter lasting effects .
As with the billy club , it can be abused ( the Rodney King incident for instance ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Realistically, tasers are roughly equivalent to billy club/kinghtsticks with (depending on model) a longer reach.
I imagine that getting tased probably hurts more at initially, but on average has shorter lasting effects.
As with the billy club, it can be abused (the Rodney King incident for instance).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866042</id>
	<title>Re:If it's safer than hot pursuit, go for it</title>
	<author>MobileTatsu-NJG</author>
	<datestamp>1264170780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't remember where I saw this, it was a show sorta like "Beyond 2000" only a modern incarnation of it.  They had a demo of a Police car chasing a 'suspect'.  Beneath the car was some device bolted to something that looked an awful lot like a skateboard.  The Police driver hit a button and the device was released.  When it hit the ground these rockets went off and Shoooooooooom! the thing fired head, rolled under the 'suspect' car, and emitted a short-range burst that fried the electronics in the engine.</p><p>There are lots of obvious things wrong with this approach, but dang that demo was neat.  Assuming the delivery system was reasonably reliable, I wonder if that would reduce the number of potential bystander injuries.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't remember where I saw this , it was a show sorta like " Beyond 2000 " only a modern incarnation of it .
They had a demo of a Police car chasing a 'suspect' .
Beneath the car was some device bolted to something that looked an awful lot like a skateboard .
The Police driver hit a button and the device was released .
When it hit the ground these rockets went off and Shoooooooooom !
the thing fired head , rolled under the 'suspect ' car , and emitted a short-range burst that fried the electronics in the engine.There are lots of obvious things wrong with this approach , but dang that demo was neat .
Assuming the delivery system was reasonably reliable , I wonder if that would reduce the number of potential bystander injuries .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't remember where I saw this, it was a show sorta like "Beyond 2000" only a modern incarnation of it.
They had a demo of a Police car chasing a 'suspect'.
Beneath the car was some device bolted to something that looked an awful lot like a skateboard.
The Police driver hit a button and the device was released.
When it hit the ground these rockets went off and Shoooooooooom!
the thing fired head, rolled under the 'suspect' car, and emitted a short-range burst that fried the electronics in the engine.There are lots of obvious things wrong with this approach, but dang that demo was neat.
Assuming the delivery system was reasonably reliable, I wonder if that would reduce the number of potential bystander injuries.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866148</id>
	<title>Re:Questions</title>
	<author>ceoyoyo</author>
	<datestamp>1264171740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The same thing that happens when you run out of gas going 70 mph.  Fortunately cars don't suddenly swerve violently, flip over and explode when the ignition is turned off, even if they're moving at the time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The same thing that happens when you run out of gas going 70 mph .
Fortunately cars do n't suddenly swerve violently , flip over and explode when the ignition is turned off , even if they 're moving at the time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The same thing that happens when you run out of gas going 70 mph.
Fortunately cars don't suddenly swerve violently, flip over and explode when the ignition is turned off, even if they're moving at the time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865506</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867468</id>
	<title>Re:This isn't new a new idea at all.</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1264188300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most vehicles with distributors on the road today have electronic ignition. Breaker points were deprecated in favor of an ignitor transistor long before cars went computer-controlled; Chrysler started doing it in the sixties. If you manage to activate that transistor remotely, you can cause the coil to over-fire, with predictably negative results.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most vehicles with distributors on the road today have electronic ignition .
Breaker points were deprecated in favor of an ignitor transistor long before cars went computer-controlled ; Chrysler started doing it in the sixties .
If you manage to activate that transistor remotely , you can cause the coil to over-fire , with predictably negative results .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most vehicles with distributors on the road today have electronic ignition.
Breaker points were deprecated in favor of an ignitor transistor long before cars went computer-controlled; Chrysler started doing it in the sixties.
If you manage to activate that transistor remotely, you can cause the coil to over-fire, with predictably negative results.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866226</id>
	<title>Re:This is an anti-robot weapon, not anti-car</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264172640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>1. It will kill the car, not merely create a carefully programmed disabling like the Onstar system. Most likely this leads to a car crash and quite likely require complete replacement of all electronics.</p></div></blockquote><p>Have you ever driven a car where the engine failed at speed?  I have -- all that happens is the steering goes stiff and the car starts to slow down.  You've got plenty of time to make your way out of the traffic lanes.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
It will kill the car , not merely create a carefully programmed disabling like the Onstar system .
Most likely this leads to a car crash and quite likely require complete replacement of all electronics.Have you ever driven a car where the engine failed at speed ?
I have -- all that happens is the steering goes stiff and the car starts to slow down .
You 've got plenty of time to make your way out of the traffic lanes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
It will kill the car, not merely create a carefully programmed disabling like the Onstar system.
Most likely this leads to a car crash and quite likely require complete replacement of all electronics.Have you ever driven a car where the engine failed at speed?
I have -- all that happens is the steering goes stiff and the car starts to slow down.
You've got plenty of time to make your way out of the traffic lanes.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865548</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865528</id>
	<title>Loss of potential acronymic irony</title>
	<author>bobdotorg</author>
	<datestamp>1264166880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If only they called it the:</p><p>High ElectroMagnetic Power System</p><p>the headlines could read:</p><p>"Cops Use HEMPS to Catch Criminals"</p><p>Hemp - is there anything it \_can't\_ do?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If only they called it the : High ElectroMagnetic Power Systemthe headlines could read : " Cops Use HEMPS to Catch Criminals " Hemp - is there anything it \ _ca n't \ _ do ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If only they called it the:High ElectroMagnetic Power Systemthe headlines could read:"Cops Use HEMPS to Catch Criminals"Hemp - is there anything it \_can't\_ do?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865902</id>
	<title>Secondary effect on criminals</title>
	<author>horza</author>
	<datestamp>1264169580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If it fails to stop the car at least it may knock out the onboard GPS. Then after they get lost and run out of petrol the police can just pick them up.</p><p>Phillip.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If it fails to stop the car at least it may knock out the onboard GPS .
Then after they get lost and run out of petrol the police can just pick them up.Phillip .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it fails to stop the car at least it may knock out the onboard GPS.
Then after they get lost and run out of petrol the police can just pick them up.Phillip.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865586</id>
	<title>What a great tool for robbery!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264167240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>A focused EMP beam from a gun?  What a great way to destroy video cameras &amp; alarm systems!  It sure would make robbery a LOT easier.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A focused EMP beam from a gun ?
What a great way to destroy video cameras &amp; alarm systems !
It sure would make robbery a LOT easier .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A focused EMP beam from a gun?
What a great way to destroy video cameras &amp; alarm systems!
It sure would make robbery a LOT easier.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866880</id>
	<title>Viper</title>
	<author>tru3ntropy</author>
	<datestamp>1264180320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Does any one else remember that tv series Viper <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viper\_(TV\_series)" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viper\_(TV\_series)</a> [wikipedia.org]?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does any one else remember that tv series Viper http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viper \ _ ( TV \ _series ) [ wikipedia.org ] ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does any one else remember that tv series Viper http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viper\_(TV\_series) [wikipedia.org]?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865494</id>
	<title>2005 Called, they want their article back.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264166700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Old news is old.  I still remember when this was a new and shiny idea.  Just wish I remembered where I put that onion for my belt...  Hmm....</p><p>Oh, and get off my lawn!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Old news is old .
I still remember when this was a new and shiny idea .
Just wish I remembered where I put that onion for my belt... Hmm....Oh , and get off my lawn !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Old news is old.
I still remember when this was a new and shiny idea.
Just wish I remembered where I put that onion for my belt...  Hmm....Oh, and get off my lawn!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865480</id>
	<title>Tor - Wonderland's Largest Honeypot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264166580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Though the looking glass, Alice wrote:</p><p>Dear Trusting Fools,</p><p>I invited the jabberwocky and his friends into the white rabbit's house where I'm staying and he slipped something into the sauce. It's for your own good, you know.</p><p>Love,</p><p>Alice</p><p>++</p><p>The note is slipped through the looking glass and on the other side it reads:</p><p>Dear Friends,</p><p>Goodness! I've had some troubled times here in Wonderland, but everything is resolved and it has nothing to do with the sauce, everything is fine!</p><p>Love,</p><p>Alice</p><p>PS. I have a whole new batch of sauce you really should try! We're switching to the new batch now, we urge you to switch, too, for the sake of your health! We've added new vitamins!</p><p>++</p><p>Sure, Roger, I mean Alice, we trust everything you've said in the mailing list.. did I mention how delicious this new sauce tastes? mmm, mm!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Though the looking glass , Alice wrote : Dear Trusting Fools,I invited the jabberwocky and his friends into the white rabbit 's house where I 'm staying and he slipped something into the sauce .
It 's for your own good , you know.Love,Alice + + The note is slipped through the looking glass and on the other side it reads : Dear Friends,Goodness !
I 've had some troubled times here in Wonderland , but everything is resolved and it has nothing to do with the sauce , everything is fine ! Love,AlicePS .
I have a whole new batch of sauce you really should try !
We 're switching to the new batch now , we urge you to switch , too , for the sake of your health !
We 've added new vitamins ! + + Sure , Roger , I mean Alice , we trust everything you 've said in the mailing list.. did I mention how delicious this new sauce tastes ?
mmm , mm !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Though the looking glass, Alice wrote:Dear Trusting Fools,I invited the jabberwocky and his friends into the white rabbit's house where I'm staying and he slipped something into the sauce.
It's for your own good, you know.Love,Alice++The note is slipped through the looking glass and on the other side it reads:Dear Friends,Goodness!
I've had some troubled times here in Wonderland, but everything is resolved and it has nothing to do with the sauce, everything is fine!Love,AlicePS.
I have a whole new batch of sauce you really should try!
We're switching to the new batch now, we urge you to switch, too, for the sake of your health!
We've added new vitamins!++Sure, Roger, I mean Alice, we trust everything you've said in the mailing list.. did I mention how delicious this new sauce tastes?
mmm, mm!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865490</id>
	<title>Microprocessor?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264166700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What if you drive a car without a microprocessor system?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What if you drive a car without a microprocessor system ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What if you drive a car without a microprocessor system?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867294</id>
	<title>Remember "Don't Taze Me Bro"?</title>
	<author>mdmkolbe</author>
	<datestamp>1264185180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In "don't taze me bro", the kid might have been making scene and being disruptive, but that just shows that the cops are willing to use the Tazer on a kid who is just making a scene and being disruptive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In " do n't taze me bro " , the kid might have been making scene and being disruptive , but that just shows that the cops are willing to use the Tazer on a kid who is just making a scene and being disruptive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In "don't taze me bro", the kid might have been making scene and being disruptive, but that just shows that the cops are willing to use the Tazer on a kid who is just making a scene and being disruptive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865910</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865538</id>
	<title>I'm assuming any serious criminal</title>
	<author>Undernet-hobbit</author>
	<datestamp>1264166940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Would build a faraday cage around the sensitive electronics in a vehicle once a device like this comes to fruition for the authorities...  I guess it's good for your ho-hum car-jacker though</htmltext>
<tokenext>Would build a faraday cage around the sensitive electronics in a vehicle once a device like this comes to fruition for the authorities... I guess it 's good for your ho-hum car-jacker though</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Would build a faraday cage around the sensitive electronics in a vehicle once a device like this comes to fruition for the authorities...  I guess it's good for your ho-hum car-jacker though</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865596</id>
	<title>Re:I can't wait...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264167300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...until the criminals get hold of this. And they will. It would be too useful not to.</p><p>I wonder if it works on helicopters also?</p></div><p>Maybe.<br>Since a lot of police helicopters are (Vietnam era) Army surplus, there isn't much in the way of electronics to kill. You'd undoubtedly be able to knock out their fancy doo-dads, but the actual helo itself is mostly mechanical and hydralic systems.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...until the criminals get hold of this .
And they will .
It would be too useful not to.I wonder if it works on helicopters also ? Maybe.Since a lot of police helicopters are ( Vietnam era ) Army surplus , there is n't much in the way of electronics to kill .
You 'd undoubtedly be able to knock out their fancy doo-dads , but the actual helo itself is mostly mechanical and hydralic systems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...until the criminals get hold of this.
And they will.
It would be too useful not to.I wonder if it works on helicopters also?Maybe.Since a lot of police helicopters are (Vietnam era) Army surplus, there isn't much in the way of electronics to kill.
You'd undoubtedly be able to knock out their fancy doo-dads, but the actual helo itself is mostly mechanical and hydralic systems.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865460</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867106</id>
	<title>Re:If it's safer than hot pursuit, go for it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264182600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, but what if it's safer for the criminals and less safe for the bystanders who get their cars zapped (or their household electronics/pacemakers/etc. zapped)?</p><p>Honestly, they'd do better to mandate that cars come with remote control circuits that the police can access and shut down on demand...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , but what if it 's safer for the criminals and less safe for the bystanders who get their cars zapped ( or their household electronics/pacemakers/etc .
zapped ) ? Honestly , they 'd do better to mandate that cars come with remote control circuits that the police can access and shut down on demand.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, but what if it's safer for the criminals and less safe for the bystanders who get their cars zapped (or their household electronics/pacemakers/etc.
zapped)?Honestly, they'd do better to mandate that cars come with remote control circuits that the police can access and shut down on demand...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866394</id>
	<title>Re:This is an anti-robot weapon, not anti-car</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264174560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>WOW, you have it all figured out. You should be president or something.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>WOW , you have it all figured out .
You should be president or something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WOW, you have it all figured out.
You should be president or something.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865548</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865512</id>
	<title>Uh-oh...</title>
	<author>Third Position</author>
	<datestamp>1264166760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm not sure I like the sound of this. Consider the lesson of the taser. Now that the cops have a weapon that doesn't kill or maim, they've gotten increasingly slap-happy about using it. Cops were at least cautious about using firearms, least they have to defend themselves against using deadly force. But they're happy to pull out the taser at the drop of a hat.
<br> <br>
This may sound like a good idea, but I suspect the cops will be using this a lot more liberally than intended.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure I like the sound of this .
Consider the lesson of the taser .
Now that the cops have a weapon that does n't kill or maim , they 've gotten increasingly slap-happy about using it .
Cops were at least cautious about using firearms , least they have to defend themselves against using deadly force .
But they 're happy to pull out the taser at the drop of a hat .
This may sound like a good idea , but I suspect the cops will be using this a lot more liberally than intended .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure I like the sound of this.
Consider the lesson of the taser.
Now that the cops have a weapon that doesn't kill or maim, they've gotten increasingly slap-happy about using it.
Cops were at least cautious about using firearms, least they have to defend themselves against using deadly force.
But they're happy to pull out the taser at the drop of a hat.
This may sound like a good idea, but I suspect the cops will be using this a lot more liberally than intended.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865856</id>
	<title>Re:This is an anti-robot weapon, not anti-car</title>
	<author>CodeBuster</author>
	<datestamp>1264169160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nevermind the fact that this has "massive liability" (i.e. instant class action lawsuits) written all over it; especially for the manufacturer of the device (Eureka Aerospace). The car might as well be sent to the crusher after being hit with this device because it will effectively be a complete loss with damaged or destroyed electronics. No doubt the insurance companies, who will be forced to "total out" stolen vehicles hit with this device, will have a thing or two to say as well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nevermind the fact that this has " massive liability " ( i.e .
instant class action lawsuits ) written all over it ; especially for the manufacturer of the device ( Eureka Aerospace ) .
The car might as well be sent to the crusher after being hit with this device because it will effectively be a complete loss with damaged or destroyed electronics .
No doubt the insurance companies , who will be forced to " total out " stolen vehicles hit with this device , will have a thing or two to say as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nevermind the fact that this has "massive liability" (i.e.
instant class action lawsuits) written all over it; especially for the manufacturer of the device (Eureka Aerospace).
The car might as well be sent to the crusher after being hit with this device because it will effectively be a complete loss with damaged or destroyed electronics.
No doubt the insurance companies, who will be forced to "total out" stolen vehicles hit with this device, will have a thing or two to say as well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865548</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867198</id>
	<title>Re:Onstar?</title>
	<author>Myopic</author>
	<datestamp>1264183620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not the same; similar.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not the same ; similar .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not the same; similar.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865536</id>
	<title>"I wonder if they'll test it on Pacemakers."</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264166940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sure, but not intentionally.  They'll also "test" it on parked vehicles, tv sets, computers, iPods, traffic light controllers, and anything else that happens to get into the "beam" as the cops treat it as a precise magic car-killer that affects only cars and only the ones they aim at.</p><p>Eventually there will be an "underground" business in installing filters and shielding.  It will become illegal to possess ferrite beads without a license.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure , but not intentionally .
They 'll also " test " it on parked vehicles , tv sets , computers , iPods , traffic light controllers , and anything else that happens to get into the " beam " as the cops treat it as a precise magic car-killer that affects only cars and only the ones they aim at.Eventually there will be an " underground " business in installing filters and shielding .
It will become illegal to possess ferrite beads without a license .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure, but not intentionally.
They'll also "test" it on parked vehicles, tv sets, computers, iPods, traffic light controllers, and anything else that happens to get into the "beam" as the cops treat it as a precise magic car-killer that affects only cars and only the ones they aim at.Eventually there will be an "underground" business in installing filters and shielding.
It will become illegal to possess ferrite beads without a license.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866766</id>
	<title>Re:If it's safer than hot pursuit, go for it</title>
	<author>gillbates</author>
	<datestamp>1264179120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
In that same time frame, about two orders of magnitude more people were killed in ordinary automobile accidents.  Around 30,000 people die in collisions every *year*.
</p><p>
Think about it: why not just outlaw cars completely?  You'd save ten times the number of lives as this thing would.
</p><p>
The great difficulty I have with this is that it is inherently anti-freedom.  These arguments in favor of safety *never* make sense, because *everything* in life carries a risk.  What this does is removes control, and hence, some responsibility, from criminals.  Someone facing a reckless driving charge may be able to argue that they're only partially at fault because the police *could* have prevented an accident.  And once this happens, the police *will* use them for even mundane traffic stops, leaving you and I with the repair bill.
</p><p>
But that isn't even the worst of it.  There are times when stopping for the police really is a bad idea:
</p><ol> <li>In suburban Chicago, a Black couple was shot at by drunken Cook County deputies on their way home from a police ball.  They managed to escape injury (with a bullet in their roof, no less) by driving to a police station in neighboring Dupage county.  But if the police had possessed the means of remotely disabling their vehicle, they'd be dead.  And, oh, btw, a judge dismissed all charges against the officers.</li>
<li>Imagine for a moment that you need to get to the hospital quickly - a lacerated jugular, pregnant wife, etc... Clearly, if you wait for the ambulance to show up, you're going to at least double the amount of time it takes for you to get stabilizing treatment.  The fastest, lowest risk option is just to get in the car and go.
But if the police can disable remotely your vehicle, it is very likely you won't make it in time.</li>
<li>I do know of people who have, successfully outrun the police.  The problem is, they always got caught.  Before the officer turns on his lights, he's got the plate number, and if he wants to push it, he'll just call ahead to his buddies.  There is very seldom a real, compelling law enforcement reason for the much publicized high-speed chase.  Even in cases where the car in question must be stopped, it can be accomplished with little more than letting the driver run out of gas.  The cops can switch out vehicles; the escapee cannot.</li>
</ol></htmltext>
<tokenext>In that same time frame , about two orders of magnitude more people were killed in ordinary automobile accidents .
Around 30,000 people die in collisions every * year * .
Think about it : why not just outlaw cars completely ?
You 'd save ten times the number of lives as this thing would .
The great difficulty I have with this is that it is inherently anti-freedom .
These arguments in favor of safety * never * make sense , because * everything * in life carries a risk .
What this does is removes control , and hence , some responsibility , from criminals .
Someone facing a reckless driving charge may be able to argue that they 're only partially at fault because the police * could * have prevented an accident .
And once this happens , the police * will * use them for even mundane traffic stops , leaving you and I with the repair bill .
But that is n't even the worst of it .
There are times when stopping for the police really is a bad idea : In suburban Chicago , a Black couple was shot at by drunken Cook County deputies on their way home from a police ball .
They managed to escape injury ( with a bullet in their roof , no less ) by driving to a police station in neighboring Dupage county .
But if the police had possessed the means of remotely disabling their vehicle , they 'd be dead .
And , oh , btw , a judge dismissed all charges against the officers .
Imagine for a moment that you need to get to the hospital quickly - a lacerated jugular , pregnant wife , etc... Clearly , if you wait for the ambulance to show up , you 're going to at least double the amount of time it takes for you to get stabilizing treatment .
The fastest , lowest risk option is just to get in the car and go .
But if the police can disable remotely your vehicle , it is very likely you wo n't make it in time .
I do know of people who have , successfully outrun the police .
The problem is , they always got caught .
Before the officer turns on his lights , he 's got the plate number , and if he wants to push it , he 'll just call ahead to his buddies .
There is very seldom a real , compelling law enforcement reason for the much publicized high-speed chase .
Even in cases where the car in question must be stopped , it can be accomplished with little more than letting the driver run out of gas .
The cops can switch out vehicles ; the escapee can not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
In that same time frame, about two orders of magnitude more people were killed in ordinary automobile accidents.
Around 30,000 people die in collisions every *year*.
Think about it: why not just outlaw cars completely?
You'd save ten times the number of lives as this thing would.
The great difficulty I have with this is that it is inherently anti-freedom.
These arguments in favor of safety *never* make sense, because *everything* in life carries a risk.
What this does is removes control, and hence, some responsibility, from criminals.
Someone facing a reckless driving charge may be able to argue that they're only partially at fault because the police *could* have prevented an accident.
And once this happens, the police *will* use them for even mundane traffic stops, leaving you and I with the repair bill.
But that isn't even the worst of it.
There are times when stopping for the police really is a bad idea:
 In suburban Chicago, a Black couple was shot at by drunken Cook County deputies on their way home from a police ball.
They managed to escape injury (with a bullet in their roof, no less) by driving to a police station in neighboring Dupage county.
But if the police had possessed the means of remotely disabling their vehicle, they'd be dead.
And, oh, btw, a judge dismissed all charges against the officers.
Imagine for a moment that you need to get to the hospital quickly - a lacerated jugular, pregnant wife, etc... Clearly, if you wait for the ambulance to show up, you're going to at least double the amount of time it takes for you to get stabilizing treatment.
The fastest, lowest risk option is just to get in the car and go.
But if the police can disable remotely your vehicle, it is very likely you won't make it in time.
I do know of people who have, successfully outrun the police.
The problem is, they always got caught.
Before the officer turns on his lights, he's got the plate number, and if he wants to push it, he'll just call ahead to his buddies.
There is very seldom a real, compelling law enforcement reason for the much publicized high-speed chase.
Even in cases where the car in question must be stopped, it can be accomplished with little more than letting the driver run out of gas.
The cops can switch out vehicles; the escapee cannot.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866014</id>
	<title>Re:If it's safer than hot pursuit, go for it</title>
	<author>Thagg</author>
	<datestamp>1264170600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My aunt was a deputy sheriff.  She says that pursuing a car is just like pulling a gun, and it is a an absolute last resort. The chances of injury, especially to uninvolved bystanders, is very high.  Setting up roadblocks was their preferred mode of stopping people (of course, in Aspen it's a lot easier, there are very few roads)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My aunt was a deputy sheriff .
She says that pursuing a car is just like pulling a gun , and it is a an absolute last resort .
The chances of injury , especially to uninvolved bystanders , is very high .
Setting up roadblocks was their preferred mode of stopping people ( of course , in Aspen it 's a lot easier , there are very few roads )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My aunt was a deputy sheriff.
She says that pursuing a car is just like pulling a gun, and it is a an absolute last resort.
The chances of injury, especially to uninvolved bystanders, is very high.
Setting up roadblocks was their preferred mode of stopping people (of course, in Aspen it's a lot easier, there are very few roads)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867800</id>
	<title>Summary sucks ala On-Star</title>
	<author>BLKMGK</author>
	<datestamp>1264279680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually READ the linked article on On-Star before trying to summarize it please! On-Star doesn't "beam" a signal down from a satellite - it uses CELL PHONE technology. The only satellite involved in that scenario is the ones in the sky enabling the GPS. Unlike in some crap movies GPS is actually ONE-WAY and you're not beaming your location or anything else back UP. They're simply querying the GPS to find out the current location of the vehicle via cell phone - nothing else. CSI TV technology this ain't.</p><p>Also - if you READ the article the signal sent to the On-Star simply tells it to not START the next time the thief tries to use it. It does NOT cripple the computer, it does not degrade the performance, it simply tells the computer not to restart. "Block the ignition on the next restart" is that NOT clear enough? REstart as in the NEXT time someone turns the key for a start. So if it's running this article doesn't say squat about turning it off remotely.</p><p>On-Star has plenty of things going for it that I don't like and wouldn't want in my car - to include at one point the ability for law enforcement to remotely eavesdrop on you - so you really don't have to make up crazy things and lose credibility.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually READ the linked article on On-Star before trying to summarize it please !
On-Star does n't " beam " a signal down from a satellite - it uses CELL PHONE technology .
The only satellite involved in that scenario is the ones in the sky enabling the GPS .
Unlike in some crap movies GPS is actually ONE-WAY and you 're not beaming your location or anything else back UP .
They 're simply querying the GPS to find out the current location of the vehicle via cell phone - nothing else .
CSI TV technology this ai n't.Also - if you READ the article the signal sent to the On-Star simply tells it to not START the next time the thief tries to use it .
It does NOT cripple the computer , it does not degrade the performance , it simply tells the computer not to restart .
" Block the ignition on the next restart " is that NOT clear enough ?
REstart as in the NEXT time someone turns the key for a start .
So if it 's running this article does n't say squat about turning it off remotely.On-Star has plenty of things going for it that I do n't like and would n't want in my car - to include at one point the ability for law enforcement to remotely eavesdrop on you - so you really do n't have to make up crazy things and lose credibility .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually READ the linked article on On-Star before trying to summarize it please!
On-Star doesn't "beam" a signal down from a satellite - it uses CELL PHONE technology.
The only satellite involved in that scenario is the ones in the sky enabling the GPS.
Unlike in some crap movies GPS is actually ONE-WAY and you're not beaming your location or anything else back UP.
They're simply querying the GPS to find out the current location of the vehicle via cell phone - nothing else.
CSI TV technology this ain't.Also - if you READ the article the signal sent to the On-Star simply tells it to not START the next time the thief tries to use it.
It does NOT cripple the computer, it does not degrade the performance, it simply tells the computer not to restart.
"Block the ignition on the next restart" is that NOT clear enough?
REstart as in the NEXT time someone turns the key for a start.
So if it's running this article doesn't say squat about turning it off remotely.On-Star has plenty of things going for it that I don't like and wouldn't want in my car - to include at one point the ability for law enforcement to remotely eavesdrop on you - so you really don't have to make up crazy things and lose credibility.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867780</id>
	<title>Stolen Car</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264279140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What if the car was stolen. EMP, will damage the owners property.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What if the car was stolen .
EMP , will damage the owners property .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What if the car was stolen.
EMP, will damage the owners property.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30872794
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867198
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866280
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866220
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30881086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865862
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866766
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30868862
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866332
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867862
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865536
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866572
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865750
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865886
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866448
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865804
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866296
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865912
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30869262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30868542
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865856
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867152
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865850
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30874452
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865804
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866742
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867420
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30868834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867426
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865536
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30868160
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865536
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30874104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865498
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865792
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865856
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866162
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867502
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866226
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30868854
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866144
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865586
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866544
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866868
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865856
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866962
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865460
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865822
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865592
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866354
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866042
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865944
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865460
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866158
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867078
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866394
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865460
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866496
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865538
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865920
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866654
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865498
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865672
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865856
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30869318
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865804
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866124
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30869870
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30872678
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867118
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865650
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866994
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865498
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30868514
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866014
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866148
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867122
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866126
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867294
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867106
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865750
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866154
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866592
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866596
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867472
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865586
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866704
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866652
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865460
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865596
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865498
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866626
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867352
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865848
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867526
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866784
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865536
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867414
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_22_2339204_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866106
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2339204.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865586
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866704
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866544
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2339204.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865592
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866354
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2339204.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866436
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30872794
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2339204.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866880
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2339204.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866018
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867468
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867472
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866448
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867502
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2339204.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865490
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30869262
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866114
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2339204.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865548
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866394
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865856
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866962
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866146
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867152
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30869318
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866162
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866144
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866226
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30868854
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2339204.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865966
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2339204.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865460
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866158
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867078
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865864
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865554
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865822
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865596
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2339204.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865506
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865848
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865886
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866148
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2339204.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865608
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2339204.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865804
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866742
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866296
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866124
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2339204.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865498
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30868514
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865672
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865720
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866626
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2339204.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865496
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866592
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867118
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866014
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866766
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30869870
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867106
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866994
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866654
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867752
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866042
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866332
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866216
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2339204.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865446
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865536
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867414
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30868160
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866572
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30874104
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30868834
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30881086
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865944
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867862
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866106
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865598
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867426
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867352
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2339204.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865466
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865594
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865792
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865850
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30874452
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866596
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866652
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866952
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867198
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2339204.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866428
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2339204.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865442
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2339204.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865538
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865920
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2339204.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866536
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2339204.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865512
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866262
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866784
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865910
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867754
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867294
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30868862
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30872678
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30868542
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867122
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867526
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866126
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30867420
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865912
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865896
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866868
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2339204.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865492
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866220
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865650
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865862
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865750
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866350
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866154
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866496
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866606
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30866280
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_22_2339204.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_22_2339204.30865854
</commentlist>
</conversation>
